Falls over laughing

[Thesunmaid]

I was on my way home from work waiting at my bus stop when this Mormon comes to me and my co worker and we are both atheists so we were not in the mood to hear their we love us some Jesus speel. So I looked at her and said"Let me handle this.."I looked at the guy with a huge grin and he asked"Have you heard the good news?"I jumped up and said"Unicorns are real?!" he looked startled and said "uhh....no..."I then proceeded to pout and apparently this made him panic so he said"B...But they might..umm...in heaven.."I then grinned and then saw my bus coming and said"Yay! well thats good to know. ok well there is my bus so thanks for talking about unicorns with me..have a nice day!" and left him there looking bewildered.

just thought I would share.

[Funguy81]

So, you just assumed he was going to you and your friend to give his sermon. He could have went there simply waiting for a bus like you.

I will have to say that the joke was cute and original. Hehe.

[Oniya]

He did start out with 'Have you heard the good news.'  Usually, there's some unspoken capital letters there, but regardless, her answer still left him an opening to share whatever 'good news' he was talking about, whether that was the Good News, or just that [random]bus fares were going down next month.[/random]

[Iniquitous]

I am not a fan of these kind of antics. I am the one that will simply tell them ‘thanks, but no thanks. Have a blessed day!’ and move on with my life. I see no sense in trying to scare them, embarrass them, bewilder them or what have you. Generally, such behavior leaves them feeling that their belief that we all need praying over/preached to is correct. In other words, it encourages them.

[Callie Del Noire]

One of my mentors, a self professed lapsed Mississippi Jew, was home after a back breaking 5 day 19 hour shifts grind on the moat when someone rang his door bell at 7 AM on our first day off in like 10 weeks. (Our shop chief was a dick what can I say)

He opens the door to some straight starched dude in a suit (in 85+ California summer) who goes. "Have you found Jeasus?"

his reply. "What you Gentiles lose him again?!"  Slammed the door in his face and stomped back to bed. Said he could sleep for laughing. 

[Funguy81]

He did start out with 'Have you heard the good news.'  Usually, there's some unspoken capital letters there, but regardless, her answer still left him an opening to share whatever 'good news' he was talking about, whether that was the Good News, or just that [random]bus fares were going down next month.[/random]

An ok, I misread it, and thought she asked that question before he had the chance to say or do anything. 

[TaintedAndDelish]

Good one, TSM :)

[Cyrano Johnson]

I see no sense in trying to scare them, embarrass them, bewilder them or what have you. Generally, such behavior leaves them feeling that their belief that we all need praying over/preached to is correct. In other words, it encourages them.

Meh, not like they need much encouraging. I'm the same way, but if the opportunity for a good joke presents itself... well, what the heck. Not going to hurt someone to be joked with a little bit.

Also, I've always thought "Have you heard the Good News?" was an incredibly shitty opener. Using that line, you are practically begging for someone to do just what TSM did there.

[Oniya]

Worst I've done at a bus stop is convince the guy that I was a visiting chess player from Budapest.

[Beorning]

Worst I've done at a bus stop is convince the guy that I was a visiting chess player from Budapest.

...why would you do that..?

[Oniya]

Why I would try to convince someone I was from far away:  Mostly so that they wouldn't expect to ever see me again.

Why a chess player from Budapest:  I'd actually played that character in a LARP the weekend before, and I still had plenty of the character profile in my head.

[gaggedLouise]

One of my mentors, a self professed lapsed Mississippi Jew, was home after a back breaking 5 day 19 hour shifts grind on the moat when someone rang his door bell at 7 AM on our first day off in like 10 weeks. (Our shop chief was a dick what can I say)

He opens the door to some straight starched dude in a suit (in 85+ California summer) who goes. "Have you found Jeasus?"

his reply. "What you Gentiles lose him again?!"  Slammed the door in his face and stomped back to bed. Said he could sleep for laughing.

Heard this one before but it's a line I cherish.  :-)

[gaggedLouise]

Old-style classroom conversation - found this one in a jubilee book from my old high school:

Teacher (having stated something he thinks the student should have mastered quite some time ago, standing next to the guy but aiming for the entire class to hear): "Do we understand this?"
Student: "Yeah, at any rate I do, Sir."

[Pumpkin Seeds]

So essentially you saw someone coming that looked Mormon.  Then you prepared to mock him and when he opened his mouth to discuss something that he obviously feels strongly enough about to go around talking to strangers about, you publicly ridicule him so that you and your friend can have a cheap laugh at his expense?  Then on top of that you just run off laughing at him.  Wow.  So I wonder if I bragged about doing this to someone going door-to-door promoting gay rights, environmental causes or any other campaign that someone felt was important if I would be thought of as funny.  I don’t understand the humor of being rude or finding a laugh at the expense of a random stranger.

[Cyrano Johnson]

So I wonder if I bragged about doing this to someone going door-to-door promoting gay rights, environmental causes or any other campaign that someone felt was important if I would be thought of as funny.

Well let's break it down:

Done at the expense of someone who was promoting something that's a concrete social good irrespective of faith, I wouldn't find it funny. Maybe you agree with the cause, maybe not, in any case the person has a half-decent reason to be knocking at the door or approaching you on the street.

Done at the expense of someone who's selling a product, meh. Maybe the product is useful, at any rate people have to make a living, I incline more toward sympathy and a "just say no" attitude.

Done at the expense of someone who's simply pushing, unasked, their own certitude about the hereafter and the nature of God: sure, funny. Because in the normal course of interaction and conversation they are doing a rude and presumptuous thing, and it's funny to skewer rude and presumptuous people, and if one is going to go around doing such rude and presumptuous things -- let alone successfully overcome that initial deficit to actually persuade someone one's religion is worthwhile -- then one had better develop either a thick skin or a sense of humour.

Joking at someone's expense is of course not strictly speaking a nice thing to do. But in life one often has to choose between the nice thing, and the funny thing, and Man cannot subsist on Niceness alone. So it goes.

[Kythia]

I'm pretty ambivalent about unicorns being real being good news, to be honest.  They wouldn't approach me, that ship sailed long ago, so I'm not sure how much impact it would have on me personally and I imagine the novelty of seeing them in a zoo would wear off eventually.  Sure, its not actively bad news like Dragons being real or something, but I'm not sure its good.

[TaintedAndDelish]

TSM, how did you know it was a mormon? Was his magical underwear sticking out?

[gaggedLouise]

Several years ago, in the forecourt of the public library, I was approached by two kids (or college students) handing out leaflets headlined "Defend the life of Chairman Gonzalo! - and support the Shining Path in its revolutionary struggle!" The first of those slogans had been seen on posters and flyers quite a bit, the Shining Path movement (Sendero Luminoso) were being touted as the new Che Guevaras even here on the other side of the globe - and their leader Gonzalo had been captured some years before and put on trial, risking a death sentence. I knew some about them, out of personal interest and from having written and modestly researched some pieces about terrorism and militancy for a student frat media outlet, so the news of their methods - brutal mass killings of civilians in the parts of Peru they had controlled over time, and attacks on foreign politicians and embassies, including the U.S. embassy at Lima - had got through to me. I knew, moreover, that "Chairman Gonzalo" aka Abimael Guzman had a rep for being quite authoritarian, striking back at any opposition, and that the Path had never been widely supported by the people whose country they operated in..

  The young men here were locals, clearly born around here, not refugees or otherwise hispanics. One of them handed a leaflet to me and the convo ran as follows. There was no tone of enmity, even if it was plain we didn't see this in the same way:
:
A. (hands over leaflet): Hello! This is to let you know of Chairman Gonzalo!
me (looking over the paper briefly) So why should we defend the Inca? (it just came to me on the spot, referring to their brutal top-down methods and desire for absolute control)
A (unflappably): Sometimes iron discipline is needed to achieve results.
me: Right. (stuffs leaflet in shoulder bag and walks on)

[Pumpkin Seeds]

A person giving a campaign speech or social movement presentation is no different than someone attempting to present their religion.  The concept is the same, an attempt to either gain support from a believer or convert a non-believer over to your own ideology.  Whether this is converting an atheist to Christianity or a disbeliever of global warming into a believer, the concept is the same.  Ridiculing either is just as bad.

Two grown women just ridiculed a man (whom I can only assume was young since most of the Mormons on their bikes are young) for his religion in public.  Then those two women were laughing at him as they got on a bus.  All because of his faith which he didn't even have a chance to mention might I add.  They only assumed what he was going to say.  Most Mormons begin their speech with an identification of who they are, not simply “Have you heard the good news?”  For all she knows, he might have been opening with a cheesy pick up line. 

[gaggedLouise]

I think I'm with Cyrano here: sometimes being just nice (as in blandly nice) doesn't spell effective communication. Especially not in a culture where everybody seems to have something to sell and some people will go to great lengths to make you feel you have to/ought to buy their shit. I'm not particularly singling out mormons here.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0YrXjeRSoE

[Pumpkin Seeds]

So effective communication here is to make fun of someone while getting on a bus?  I could understand if the man was harassing people or continually pushing on sunmaiden after she asked him to leave her alone.  He did...none of those things.  He said a sentence. 

[gaggedLouise]

So effective communication here is to make fun of someone while getting on a bus?  I could understand if the man was harassing people or continually pushing on sunmaiden after she asked him to leave her alone.  He did...none of those things.  He said a sentence.

Well, the way she tossed off that line didn't seem to be very *aggressive* and from sunmaid's post it doesn't sound like there were any large number of people watching and overhearing it, if any. It's not as if they were pulling down the pants on him in front of a big bunch of strangers looking on.

[Pumpkin Seeds]

I don’t see much, if any, aggression from him either.  Also, I am guessing your point is that ridiculing another person for their personal beliefs is alright so long as there are not too many people around and the reaction doesn’t “seem too bad.”  Makes it alright to brag later about the act too right?

[lilhobbit37]

Anyone is free to believe what they want. But if they decide to approach me to peddle their beliefs, and I choose to turn it into something that won't ruin my day, and won't really hurt theirs either, then I see no harm in it.

If you don't want to be ridiculed, don't try to sell your faith on the streets. And her response wasn't rude, it wasn't cruel. She didn't tell him he was wrong, or an arse. She just made light of it because she didn't want to hear what he had to say.

I don't see the harm in that.

Edit: Also, given that I'm homosexual, and the mormon stance is that if I don't act on it, I'm ok, but if I do then I'm subject to face the Church's punishment (not knowing enough about the church to know what that punishment is), I have personal reason to NOT listen to a mormon push his/her beliefs on me. They can't respect my lifestyle, so I shouldn't have to listen to them selling their religion. And if I chose to joke around instead, in a way that wasn't throwing in their face that their religion can kiss my arse, then I think I did well overall.

[gaggedLouise]

I don’t see much, if any, aggression from him either.  Also, I am guessing your point is that ridiculing another person for their personal beliefs is alright so long as there are not too many people around and the reaction doesn’t “seem too bad.”  Makes it alright to brag later about the act too right?

If someone walks straight up to other people and pitches what he believes in, and implicitly what he thinks those other people should/must do to get saved, to be righteous and just, to support the good cause, whatever kind of imperative - then they cannot count on a foolproof protection against those people replying with oneliners, jokes, speaking their mind. The people they talk to may have heard the same pick-up lines from the same kind of people twenty times before, they may be in a hurry, tired or not wanting to engage in a discussion about the Bible as prophecy or whatever. If you take your beliefs or your morals face to face with other persons in some kind of public space, and make claims on those persons' time, then yes, you have to at least count in the possibility that some of them won't be all welcoming smiles.

It's not valid to act like you're feeling anchored in some moral cushion that says "nobody's allowed to talk back at me, joke or rephrase what I said to make a point, if they do any of this they are hateful and low-spirited." (well, maybe you wouldn't put it that strongly but it's an attitude I get to see sometimes: any kind of criticism or jibes equals hate).

[Pumpkin Seeds]

The problem comes that if I was in a similar situation and a person came up to me to talk about gay marriage and I made a joke out of what was said, there would be nobody here saying I had made a humorous moment.  Would that be so funny as someone making fun of a person, who didn’t even say anything about religion, being made fun of because someone thought they might say something religious?  Could I then come on Elliquiy and brag about making fun of a gay marriage supporter and receive not only a thumbs up, but also have others join in making fun of them?  All over Elliquiy I see people talking about bullying, being made fun of for their beliefs, being laughed at and in general being made to feel unwelcome by others.  Yet here we see us supporting and reinforcing someone for doing just that to another.  I think this is hypocritical of Elliquiy as a community.

[lilhobbit37]

Not really. She isn't making fun of him for being mormon, nor saying his beliefs are wrong.

It would be like me going to talk to you about gay marriage, but you changing the subject in a joking way before I could, because you know you are against it, and rather not hear me tell you all the reasons you should feel different.

And no one would be upset with you for that.

[Pumpkin Seeds]

Well actually this would be more like me seeing you coming, going "They look gay."  Then instead of being friendly toward you when you speak to me, I simply make an off color comment to make you uncomfortable and bewildered.  Then I get a good chuckle with my friend on the bus, then come online to brag about the situation so that others can laugh with me in support.

[Braioch]

Well actually this would be more like me seeing you coming, going "They look gay."  Then instead of being friendly toward you when you speak to me, I simply make an off color comment to make you uncomfortable and bewildered.  Then I get a good chuckle with my friend on the bus, then come online to brag about the situation so that others can laugh with me in support.

And yet very few people will open up with such a line as the OP mentioned, other than heavily religious people, typically of a Christian faith. As to date, I actually haven't met anyone who's opened with that line and wasn't trying to peddle their religion. Following up with trying to steer the conversation back to the afterlife of choice makes it even more so. Just how long would you prefer she had waited, until he was just getting into his speech? Or would have perhaps been too early, as he may have been just sharing a moment of inspiration surrounding his faith? Later on when he had already picked up steam? What exactly is your personal criteria for one to know a person's stance on such things?

And as for making light of it, I quite frankly don't blame her. I can't even sit on campus to enjoy a snack, some music and a book between classes without some random person trying to walk over and hand me a collection of New Testament and Proverbs. (Amusingly might I add, while I was reading "The Atheist's Handbook") At that point, you either mutter off the thousandth incantation of 'no, thank you' and probably risk your ever growing irritation showing, or attempt to make light of it. I for one, unless they are unduly aggressive about it, (as has happened more than once to me) am more apt to either ignore them utterly, or try to make light of it somehow.

My humor of choice is asking the uncomfortable questions (no, not raunchy ones :P) until they skirt around me from then on.

[Pumpkin Seeds]

I would think that an adult woman with her friend would have the ability to simply say, “No thank you.”  Perhaps even a little, “I’m sorry but we’re having a private conversation here.”  Maybe some other more mature answer.  Both of which would probably require less involvement than the course of action she decided upon.  Walking across most college campuses there will be many people coming up for signatures, donations, invitations to various organizations/clubs/social movements/what have you.  Do you intend to mock each one or perhaps just the religious ones.  Once more I am pointing out the hypocrisy of Elliquiy’s community on this subject.

[Tsenta]

I need to start carrying a diet soda can around, so every time I'm petitioned by someone who wants to "save my soul" and use that good news line..I can go  "Well have YOU heard the good news? All that taste, zero calories!" and show them the can.   All in all, while sarcasm and fun having may not be the best way to brush those people off, it surely isn't the worst way either.

A friend of mine dislikes people who "recruit" for their religions with a passion, he basically sits and debates with them about how their religions are flawed until they've either given up or are on the verge of tears. 

Long story short, this isn't the worst or nearly even one of to brush people off.

[TaintedAndDelish]

Sometimes its hard not to laugh at other people's stupidity.

[Pumpkin Seeds]

Honestly a debate is at least a decent confrontation and is at least admirable.  This was not a brush off either, but an intentional act of ridicule.  The OP had no intention of debate, discussion or even hearing what the man had to say.  She had him judged before he opened his mouth.  So this is simply surprising that Elliquiy, a community that often speaks about being shunned and laughed at, sponsors this sort of behavior. 

[gaggedLouise]

Honestly a debate is at least a decent confrontation and is at least admirable.  This was not a brush off either, but an intentional act of ridicule.  The OP had no intention of debate, discussion or even hearing what the man had to say.  She had him judged before he opened his mouth.  So this is simply surprising that Elliquiy, a community that often speaks about being shunned and laughed at, sponsors this sort of behavior.

I think it matters a great deal that, as Braioch implies, it was so easy to read, out of those one or two opening lines, exactly what kind of soul-fisher speech he was heading for.

[Imogen]

I think it matters a great deal that, as Braioch implies, it was so easy to read, out of those one or two opening lines, exactly what kind of soul-fisher speech he was heading for.

So, his message was not welcome. That makes it cool to treat someone with ridicule because you want to show off for a friend/collegue? (So I looked at her and said"Let me handle this..") That action was incredibly immature.

[gaggedLouise]

So, his message was not welcome. That makes it cool to treat someone with ridicule because you want to show off for a friend/collegue? (So I looked at her and said"Let me handle this..") That action was incredibly immature.

No, it means her way of turning the conversation was aimed at the whole speech she saw coming, and not just at the opening line "Have you heard the good news?". But I agree it's an opener you never hear from a stranger *except* from some Christians as a kick-off to expounding on their religious convictions.

By the way, I've personally witnessed, or heard of, far more brazen and more ill-tempered replies to less intrusive spoken lines than that one.

[Imogen]

No, it means her way of turning the conversation was aimed at the whole speech she saw coming, and not just at the opening line "Have you heard the good news?". But I agree it's an opener you never hear from a stranger *except* from some Christians as a kick-off to expounding on their religious convictions.

By the way, I've personally witnessed, or heard of, far more brazen and more ill-tempered replies to less intrusive spoken lines than that one.

So, it's a Christian who wants to talk about their beliefs. And that makes ridiculing him while safely backed up by a friend/collegue right and cool and funny? *shrugs* Different strokes for different people, I guess.

[gaggedLouise]

If it happens at a bus stop then yeah, I frankly think by picking that kind of location one is laying oneself open to the risk that people could respond with a few jokes. That's legitimate and human.

I don't want to get proselytized at a bus stop, anymore than when I'm getting ready to watch a movie at the theatre with a good friend, cooking or driving the car.

[Kythia]

*makes a mental note to only preach to Louise when she's at the theatre with an evil friend*

[Pumpkin Seeds]

The assumptions were already made as Imogen pointed out.  One look and she had already sized the man up, determined his religion and assumed his purpose.  We may never know what the following line might have been.  Never know what the man intended to say because he was rudely cut off and made the butt of a joke between the OP and her friend.  As I said before, there were a great many recourses she could have taken that would have been praiseworthy. That she did not take a “worse” path than she already did is not praise worthy.  That she is then able to come into the public section of Elliquiy and brag about her actions is pretty bad, worse yet that people make excuses for her.

Also, did she have to come into the public section of Elliquiy to brag about her accomplishment?  Did she have to make a thread entirely devoted to actions within the Religion and Politics thread?  Why not post her actions up on the Good and Cuddly or something of humor.  If the act was just for humor, then why not there where she could talk about something that made her laugh?  No, she posted her actions on the forum she knew would gain her praise for ridiculing someone else of religion.  Sad part is she is right.  This thread is just one excuse after another.

He’s religious, which basically translates into he deserved it.  The age old, wrong place wrong time thrown up as well as if he once more deserved it.  How dare he talk to strangers at a bus stop!  He was going to talk about his religion, as if how dare someone attempt to talk to a stranger about something they view as important.  The man looked religious and then of course people make fun of the stereotypes for Mormons.  Then people fall back to, oh it wasn’t that bad and could’ve been worse for him like she was doing him a favor. 

Seriously, is this what we’re going to do now?  Make excuses for people picking on others we don’t like, but then acting self-righteous when the tables are turned?

[gaggedLouise]

It would have been vastly different if it had been, let's say a Roman Catholic nun or priest and the other had replied by "No, what? Does the Pope s**t in the woods?" That's a much more demeaning twist, and the difference in tone has nothing to do with whether one sees Roman Catholicism as a more sympathetic religious tradition than Mormonism.

*makes a mental note to only preach to Louise when she's at the theatre with an evil friend*

Might be interesting if he's tied me up and forced me to watch Catwoman and you enter wearing a dark rubber catsuit.  :D

[Imogen]

It would have been vastly different if it had been, let's say a Roman Catholic nun or priest and the other had replied by "No, what? Does the Pope s**t in the woods?" That's a much more demeaning twist, and the difference in tone has nothing to do with whether one sees Roman Catholicism as a more sympathetic religious tradition than Mormonism.

Giving an example of a different rude act doesn't imply the original act was not rude. Not that I care about this topic much, but just pointing out a flaw in your logic.

[Rogue]

*coughs* Basically, if he had left her alone, she would have left him alone. If someone comes up to me, randomly and starts saying "Have you heard the Good news?" Or "Do you want to hear about our Lord and Savior?" (basically equivalent in the realm of "I'm going to shove my dick religion in your face!") it doesn't matter how he looked. He came up with a sale's men attitude and in her area it might mean "Mormon" because that's who does that in her area. Either way, she didn't approach him. He approached her. She threw him off guard by trying to do the same thing in response (ie: promoting the idea that a mythical creature could exist!) and thought to share this on E because, let's face it, sales people (except where you enter the place of selling) are irritating. It wasn't her going up to guys holding signs that they were Christian and cutting down their values. It was someone coming up to her, her preparing herself based on what she'd experienced in the past, and (after being proven correct) defusing the situation without being overtly rude and merely humorous.

Have you ever tried just saying no thank you to someone who is trying to peddle their religion when you're stuck in a location and can't close the door on them? It's REALLY hard. I've had it happen to me as a CASHIER! I hadn't even expected it. I wish I had come up with a way to just dumbfound them so I could escape with ease...

And I don't think it encourages them any more than saying no thanks. It's all the same. Just one more person who DOESN'T want to be converted and therefore obviously NEEDS it.

((Also, can't stand people who say "have a blessed day!" I could never bring myself to have those words come from my mouth.))

[Serephino]

I myself don't like how religion is viewed and treated on this forum, and especially this board where it's supposed to be respected.  However, one cannot deny that those people who try to shove their religion down other people's throats are extremely annoying.  If I decide to engage in a debate with someone that is one thing.  But these people intrude themselves into other peoples' lives and try to recruit them into their religion.  I'm religious, and I don't like it.  So, maybe a smart ass answer is rude, but isn't pushing religion on someone minding their own business just as rude? 

And, um, yeah, saying 'have you heard the good news?' to a stranger, that means they're about to go into a religious speech.  That's common sense.  That's the only time that phrase is ever used.  I'd have the same reaction to it.  Trying to shove your religion down someone's throat is rude.  This guy was not some innocent that was preyed upon.  He was not in a debate forum.  He was not asked a question.  He tried to force himself on strangers at a bus stop.   

[lilhobbit37]

The key here is she never once belittled him or her beliefs, told him he was wrong or anything like that. Replace unicorn with allah or abother valid religion and it would be less humoroua but just as valid. She didn't say his belifs were wrong, merely used humor to point out she had her own beliefs and prefer he not shove his down her throat.

[gaggedLouise]

The key here is she never once belittled him or his beliefs, told him he was wrong or anything like that. Replace unicorn with allah or another valid religion and it would be less humorous but just as valid. She didn't say his belifs were wrong, merely used humor to point out she had her own beliefs and prefer he not shove his down her throat.

Exactly. I don't see either how that joke would have been personally belittling, brash or demeaning.

I would never argue with the assertions of "good news" of the guy below, but that's because the song is bouncing with the force of a really lived turnover, a personal witness (also it doesn't try to push doctrines on us). The album this is from changed my life and my thoughts on some things, not by preaching but by its human and musical force (yes, it does encompass some Christian themes as well as an authentic gospel vibe) and by a personal background I was left to figure out mostly for myself (some of my readings of it being confirmed much later).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ptrag0cNIvY

[Cyrano Johnson]

I myself don't like how religion is viewed and treated on this forum, and especially this board where it's supposed to be respected.  However, one cannot deny that those people who try to shove their religion down other people's throats are extremely annoying.  If I decide to engage in a debate with someone that is one thing.  But these people intrude themselves into other peoples' lives and try to recruit them into their religion.  I'm religious, and I don't like it.  So, maybe a smart ass answer is rude, but isn't pushing religion on someone minding their own business just as rude? 

And, um, yeah, saying 'have you heard the good news?' to a stranger, that means they're about to go into a religious speech.  That's common sense.  That's the only time that phrase is ever used.  I'd have the same reaction to it.  Trying to shove your religion down someone's throat is rude.  This guy was not some innocent that was preyed upon.  He was not in a debate forum.  He was not asked a question.  He tried to force himself on strangers at a bus stop.   

Yes. This. Thank you.

[Rogue]

I myself don't like how religion is viewed and treated on this forum, and especially this board where it's supposed to be respected.  However, one cannot deny that those people who try to shove their religion down other people's throats are extremely annoying.  If I decide to engage in a debate with someone that is one thing.  But these people intrude themselves into other peoples' lives and try to recruit them into their religion.  I'm religious, and I don't like it.  So, maybe a smart ass answer is rude, but isn't pushing religion on someone minding their own business just as rude? 

And, um, yeah, saying 'have you heard the good news?' to a stranger, that means they're about to go into a religious speech.  That's common sense.  That's the only time that phrase is ever used.  I'd have the same reaction to it.  Trying to shove your religion down someone's throat is rude.  This guy was not some innocent that was preyed upon.  He was not in a debate forum.  He was not asked a question.  He tried to force himself on strangers at a bus stop.   

*blushes* I wasn't trying to be rude towards religion. I was just referencing a joke. I enjoy religious debates myself, and have no issue with religious people... until they try to tell me my lifestyle choices are wrong and I'm going to hell for them (Which to me equates to them thinking I'm as bad as murderers and rapists since most sects don't do the whole 7 layers of hell thing...) Religions are really cool and the stories are typically really interesting and the MUSIC! Omg I love the music that comes from religion most of the times (even if sometimes they read as secular love songs.) I just don't believe in the stuff.

You also made your point a lot more eloquently than I did. :)

[Serephino]

*blushes* I wasn't trying to be rude towards religion. I was just referencing a joke. I enjoy religious debates myself, and have no issue with religious people... until they try to tell me my lifestyle choices are wrong and I'm going to hell for them (Which to me equates to them thinking I'm as bad as murderers and rapists since most sects don't do the whole 7 layers of hell thing...) Religions are really cool and the stories are typically really interesting and the MUSIC! Omg I love the music that comes from religion most of the times (even if sometimes they read as secular love songs.) I just don't believe in the stuff.

You also made your point a lot more eloquently than I did. :)

I wasn't referring to you, or even this particular thread.  I was just stating that I understand how irritating the religion bashing here in PROC can be.  I think that's part of the problem Pumpkin has with this, that yet again religion is being bashed, at least in her view.

[Iniquitous]

I am going to beg to differ with all of you defending the OP. I am sorry. What she did is incredibly rude and if she had come on here to complain about someone doing the exact same thing to her when she opened her mouth to say something (again, we do not know what the man was going to say - he could just as easily been about to say ‘have you heard the good news? Congress approved military action!’] then every single one of you would be up in arms about how she had been mistreated.

You cannot have it both ways. If it is ok for us to do it to those we don’t like, don’t want around, don’t agree with, don’t respect then we need to shut up and accept it when it is done to us. Is that going to happen? Of course not… none of us like being the butt of a joke.

Imogen and Pumpkin have the right of it. TSM showed an extreme lack of maturity in her actions. Instead of acting the adult she is, she chose to pull out grade school antics to humiliate someone she doesn’t agree with. She disrespected him and she made fun of him.

Part of the problem I see constantly is so very few seem to understand the golden rule. Treat others as you wish to be treated. Would this mean TSM wants to be treated as the butt of everyone’s jokes? Somehow, I think not.

It’s real simple. Treat each other with respect. Treat each other with kindness. Even when you do not agree with them or they do not agree with you. If we all lived by that then this world would be a hell of a lot better place.

[Cyrano Johnson]

I wasn't referring to you, or even this particular thread.  I was just stating that I understand how irritating the religion bashing here in PROC can be.  I think that's part of the problem Pumpkin has with this, that yet again religion is being bashed, at least in her view.

And honestly, I'm typically on Pumpkin's side of that argument (despite my being irreligious myself). I just think she's come down with a slight case of humour-impairment in this instance.

[Serephino]

I am going to beg to differ with all of you defending the OP. I am sorry. What she did is incredibly rude and if she had come on here to complain about someone doing the exact same thing to her when she opened her mouth to say something (again, we do not know what the man was going to say - he could just as easily been about to say ‘have you heard the good news? Congress approved military action!’] then every single one of you would be up in arms about how she had been mistreated.

You cannot have it both ways. If it is ok for us to do it to those we don’t like, don’t want around, don’t agree with, don’t respect then we need to shut up and accept it when it is done to us. Is that going to happen? Of course not… none of us like being the butt of a joke.

Imogen and Pumpkin have the right of it. TSM showed an extreme lack of maturity in her actions. Instead of acting the adult she is, she chose to pull out grade school antics to humiliate someone she doesn’t agree with. She disrespected him and she made fun of him.

Part of the problem I see constantly is so very few seem to understand the golden rule. Treat others as you wish to be treated. Would this mean TSM wants to be treated as the butt of everyone’s jokes? Somehow, I think not.

It’s real simple. Treat each other with respect. Treat each other with kindness. Even when you do not agree with them or they do not agree with you. If we all lived by that then this world would be a hell of a lot better place.

Look at it this way.  Out of the blue I start pm'ing you about my religion, and why I think you should convert.  Are you going to politely ask me to stop while I repeatedly ignore your request, or are you going to report me to staff for harassment?  That's what spreading the good word is; harassment.  I treat others as I want to be treated by not shoving my religion down random stranger's throats.  Maybe two wrongs don't make a right, but the guy is not an innocent victim.  If he had left them alone he wouldn't have been the butt of a joke.

[Kythia]

I treat others as I want to be treated by not shoving my religion down random stranger's throats.

It's a good start, but really you shouldn't stuff anything down random stranger's throats.  Gag reflexes are tough to tame.

[Cyrano Johnson]

(again, we do not know what the man was going to say

With greatest respect: this seems rather like horsepucky to me, and I think you know it. I simply do not believe that you believe someone would start a conversation about Congress with the phrase "have you heard the Good News."

You cannot have it both ways.

And hence, if I accost someone out of the blue on the street, I do in fact accept the possibility that they may choose not to be polite to me.

In fact I've worked in sales, the cold-calling kind. When you're doing that kind of work, there is no getting around the fact that you are intruding on people and they have every right in the world to simply tell you to piss off, and many of them will. There is nothing wrong with that -- it isn't Eeevil Bullying, it is an insistence on personal space, and I insist on the same thing in my daily life. Getting the occasional diss is the risk you accept in taking on that kind of work, especially when you don't have the advantage of at least having a product to offer beyond your own certainty that you know God better than your target.

Besides any of that: missionaries of this type aren't made of fricking glass. They have a supportive religious community to go back to and fellow Church members to share whatever burdens the uncaring public may have heaped on them. Unclench, people. It's going to be okay.

[Cyrano Johnson]

It's a good start, but really you shouldn't stuff anything down random stranger's throats.  Gag reflexes are tough to tame.

But so worth it!

[Kythia]

But so worth it!

So I'm assured.

[gaggedLouise]

It's a good start, but really you shouldn't stuff anything down random stranger's throats.  Gag reflexes are tough to tame.

Looking my way again? *nods and sucks*

[Kythia]

Welp, I derailed the fuck out of this conversation.  I now return you to your regularly scheduled argument.

*disappears in a puff of smoke*

[gaggedLouise]

*follows Kythia out, heading for the ladies' room*

[Cyrano Johnson]

* awed whisper * Who was that mysterious beauty?

EDIT: Who were those mysterious beauties?

[Iniquitous]

Look at it this way.  Out of the blue I start pm'ing you about my religion, and why I think you should convert.  Are you going to politely ask me to stop while I repeatedly ignore your request, or are you going to report me to staff for harassment?  That's what spreading the good word is; harassment.  I treat others as I want to be treated by not shoving my religion down random stranger's throats.  Maybe two wrongs don't make a right, but the guy is not an innocent victim.  If he had left them alone he wouldn't have been the butt of a joke.

One - if I asked you to stop and you did not, there is a handy dandy ignore feature and I am not afraid to use it. BUT, I digress there. Did she ask the man to stop? No. Not even once. She just immediately launched into making him the butt of her little joke. Thus, your analogy does not stand.

Two - You are all missing the point. Like religion or don't, no difference to me. But stop thinking you have to be asshats to someone who just wants to share what is important to them. My Gods, is it that hard to say "Thanks but no thanks?" Are you all so damned calloused that you think it is alright to treat someone else like this?

You all act as if this is some great and horrible thing but let me tell you - I work with the public. I spend 8 hours a day talking to people and if I made every religious person I spoke to the butt of a joke I would lose my job in less than an hour. I constantly hear people tell me "God bless you" "Are you a christian?" "Have you found Jesus?" And guess what... I work for the cable company so it isn't even a venue that should have religion brought up! I simply thank them and then deflect the questions. It is not hard. It's as simple as a 'no thank you' or a 'I already have my beliefs'.

The point of this is TSM came on here to continue her ridicule of the man. She wanted everyone to pat her on the back, laugh with her and help her further ridicule this man and his religion.

Is that tolerant? Is that even remotely how we want to treat others? If so then maybe I am in the wrong group.

[Cyrano Johnson]

Are you all so damned calloused that you think it is alright to treat someone else like this?

Do I think it's alright to make a mild joke at the expense of someone who intrudes on me while I'm minding my own business? Yes.

Do I think it's insane -- or just inane -- to compare doing so to bullying and ridicule? Yes.

Am I working in customer service on my daily commute? No.

[Braioch]

Welp, someone beat me to the punch on the whole 'yeah, kinda rude to come shove your religion down my throat bit' already. And the 'you come a callin to me about this crap, Imma be a bit grumpy.'

-glares at Cyrano-

And you know, on a personal note, with my recent experience with the people handing out bibles (as if they're hard to get ahold of or anything) I would have just been exasperated. Instead the man took one look at the book I was reading, while I gave him a blank stare, (because honestly, I'm on a freakin' campus, having a bible shoved at me is not something I expect) and all but swelled up and hissed at me. Other times when I have told people very politely 'no thank you,' and then when they persist and I have to resort to, 'no thank you, I'm not a believer...at all,' well then suddenly they have made it their mission to convert the heretic. So if I find that a bit of humor in the face of what is a continued onslaught of religious spewing, is a much better reaction than 'piss off' then that's how it goes. You can only deal with these things so often before you start to get irritated, and you either remove someones head from their shoulders verbally, or you find some other way to vent it off.

As for the comments about how religion is treated on these forums, quite frankly, I'm going to have to disagree. From a majority of the people I have interacted with, most bear a metaphysical belief of some sort and are generally respectful of different belief systems. Of course exceptions do apply as always, and I won't deny that I have shown a certain flippancy towards religion as I personally find it...err...unbelievable, yes, that. But when you live in a country where it is perfectly acceptable for idiots to get on the radio, the TV, on your very damned doorstep and tell you how you're wrong and this individual knows just the key to save your soul (can I get an amen?) then yeah, some people are going to get fed up, they're going to get tired of it all.

What it boils down to is that there is being a demand for us to show these people some respect, and yet, that statement lacks acknowledgement that those of us who don't want to bloody well hear it, are not having our wishes respected. So instead of being able to find some way in which to deal with the situation, in which simple patience will no longer suffice after a few dozen times of attempted conversion, I advocate a different way. The OP I support, she never mocked them personally, nor did she act in a cruel and malicious manner. True, it toed the line on the 'sanctity of belief' but I certainly won't get into that little tidbit in this thread, less I derail it. She took what could have been an irritating and possibly frustrating situation and made it into a humorous situation based on how ridiculous it is. Yes, ridiculous, because it is utterly ridiculous for anyone to start selling their religion to random people on the street, completely.

[Cyrano Johnson]

-glares at Cyrano-

Sorry, bro, my bad... :P

Honestly, I do see the point some make about excessive religion-bashing on here: I think too many people take too many rhetorical cues from guys like Dick Dawkins, and we could use less of it. But a demand for complete humourlessness will not do either, and the pearl-clutching about TSM having the gall to make a unicorn joke instead of just using The Pre-Approved Phrasing of the Civilized is getting way over the top at this point. The Golden Rule is all very well, but we must not in observing it forget the Diamond Rule*.

[* The Diamond Rule is: "Fuck 'em if they can't take a joke."]

[Braioch]

Ahh Dawkins.

I like the man, I do. He makes good points, if after a time, tired points, and for the most part he's astute and on point. Now if only we could take out the whole 'kind of a dick' bit and we'd be golden. I'll stick with Fry instead ::)

[Rogue]

One - if I asked you to stop and you did not, there is a handy dandy ignore feature and I am not afraid to use it. BUT, I digress there. Did she ask the man to stop? No. Not even once. She just immediately launched into making him the butt of her little joke. Thus, your analogy does not stand.

Ignore buttons do not exist in real life and it's easier to throw someone off guard and derail the situation then to deal with a person persistent on selling you something. On a side note, he could have easily moved passed it and instead have been like, "Not yet, but still looking. Perhaps we'll find them in heaven." He could have gone along with it and found humor in it as well.

As it is, she was clever and he was not. He was being rude, by potentially interrupting their conversation or whatever they were doing to amuse themselves at the bus stop, and she decided to be clever instead of just saying "Please go away!" Yes she's finding humor in the situation! I would too! Hell it could have turned into a wonderful religious debate if he had answered in the right way! But his lack of confidence made it humorous, not the comment itself.

Sorry, bro, my bad... :P

Honestly, I do see the point some make about excessive religion-bashing on here: I think too many people take too many rhetorical cues from guys like Dick Dawkins, and we could use less of it. But a demand for complete humourlessness will not do either, and the pearl-clutching about TSM having the gall to make a unicorn joke instead of just using The Pre-Approved Phrasing of the Civilized is getting way over the top at this point. The Golden Rule is all very well, but we must not in observing it forget the Diamond Rule*.

[* The Diamond Rule is: "Fuck 'em if they can't take a joke."]

*files this rule away for use at another point*

[gaggedLouise]

I remember one of the first student tenements I was at, early in my uni career. A guy who lived next door on that floor was...a bit mentally unstable and not really a university student, he had managed to get a room anyway because the people managing the house wanted to lend a hand to persons who had been outside of mainstream society for a long time, people who had spent time in a mental hospital, refugees, people who had been on the dole for long and had little of a supporting network - this could create some strained situtaions. Anyway, my neighbour had had some mental issues, and he also had very obvious dreams of being a major preacher, an evangelist. This would come through in his talk, he badly wanted to appear and sound like a mighty evangelist and a master of praying. He also believed in the inerrancy of the Bible and its supremacy over science and history. Most of the time he was actually a nice guy, and many of us realized he was a bit vulnerable.

So, one morning I and another guy are in the kitchen having breakfast and looking through the papers. One of the fridges is suffering from a bit too much humidity and dodgy cooling. Our friend comes in, stops just by the stove, looks at us, and I mean really *stares* straight at us, taking us in as if we were new to him or he was summing up the strength to enter an important conversation. Silence. Then he says, in a voice that's clearly aiming to make it sound churchy:

"Ingemar! Why are you not putting your trust in (rising tone and much vibrato) GOD?"   

We looked blankly at each other and after the words sank in, Ingemar replied "So, will God fix the fridge?"

I don't recall how the convo continued, I think Ingemar had shot down what the guy had planned straight, with one sentence. There was no tone of meanness, but we both sort of knew there was no point in trying to make our neighbour realize how useless his efforts at evangelizing were in this place.

When I told a friend about this later on, she rocked with laughter and said "But who would begin that kind of line by stating the guy's first name? "Ingemar!" I mean, they're neighbours - and he's aiming to say something this far out".

[Blythe]

I was on my way home from work waiting at my bus stop when this Mormon comes to me and my co worker and we are both atheists so we were not in the mood to hear their we love us some Jesus speel. So I looked at her and said"Let me handle this.."I looked at the guy with a huge grin and he asked"Have you heard the good news?"I jumped up and said"Unicorns are real?!" he looked startled and said "uhh....no..."I then proceeded to pout and apparently this made him panic so he said"B...But they might..umm...in heaven.."I then grinned and then saw my bus coming and said"Yay! well thats good to know. ok well there is my bus so thanks for talking about unicorns with me..have a nice day!" and left him there looking bewildered.

just thought I would share.

.....are we sure the religious guy was panicking? Any religious guy I've talked to would have been trying to joke back if he said "B...But they might..umm...in heaven.." in regards to unicorns.  ::)

(Not saying it's a great way to joke back, but a reply like that seems like it's an attempt to roll with the humor). Sort of seems like TSM caught him off guard, he tried to joke back, and she and her friend laughed and left. Heck, that behavior seems pretty normal no matter what one would approach a stranger with in public to talk about.

[Kythia]

Shoulda done this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jBjitfXeA3I

Man I love Bowling For Soup

[Shjade]

Sorta ignoring the whole argument about whether or not it was appropriate to make a joke about "the good news," for the last few years I've always assumed the best possible answer to, "Have you heard the good news?" would be, "Yep: we finally got Obama!"

[Imogen]

Sorta ignoring the whole argument about whether or not it was appropriate to make a joke about "the good news," for the last few years I've always assumed the best possible answer to, "Have you heard the good news?" would be, "Yep: we finally got Obama!"

That's no joke :-P I think most Europeans celebrated that victory almost as hard as Obama's US supporters.

[gaggedLouise]

The East German variety would have been:

-Have you heard the good news?
-Well, I got my Trabant last year already.

[Shjade]

That's no joke :-P I think most Europeans celebrated that victory almost as hard as Obama's US supporters.

The joke is that the person speaking theoretically meant to say "Osama."

[Pumpkin Seeds]

Would her comment have been funny if the person was attempting to have her sign a pamphlet for abortion rights, gay rights, environmental causes, etc etc.?  Would I suddenly have humor impediment if that was not found to be funny by me?  Somehow I think this entire thread, mainly because people have said so, would be different if the OP had made this joke at anyone else aside from a potential Mormon.  The behavior is not justified because the victim was a Mormon.  Yes, I use the word victim because she intentional set out to make him uncomfortable and to make a joke of him simply because she thinks he is Mormon.  Just as she then came onto the Politics and Religion section to brag about her actions because she knew she would gain support and backing because she thinks he’s a Mormon.  That is malicious behavior.  Whether she actually hurt his feelings is not relevant, she set out to make herself look better at his expense.

Do I understand that putting yourself out there by presenting your religion means that people will react harshly toward that person, certainly?  I don’t pat those people on the back though and tell them good job for making fun of someone else.  When there is a gay rights parade at the French Quarter, I understand the bravery those people undertake in coming out in support.  I don’t praise the guy next to me for his witty comment ridiculing them to his friend and I highly doubt this forum would come out in support.

As for approaching her, once more simply look at the Bad and Ugly thread.  Men approach women all the time to flirt, hit on or make conversation.  If he were doing that then there would be an outcry against the OP.  Yet the man approached her in a similar, friendly fashion and asked one question.  She then set out to make him the butt of her joke with her friend.  He didn’t come up to her maliciously; attempt to cram his religion down her throat or any of those things.  We don’t know if a simply, “Please leave me alone” would have sufficed to make him go away. 

We are praising her behavior and making fun of this man all because she supposes he was a Mormon.

[lilhobbit37]

Actually, it has NOTHING to do with the fact he is mormon and everything to do with the fact that he approached her to preach his beliefs. She didn't want to hear it and countered with a belief of her own. Silly or not, it was not harmful to him for her to do so.

You keep alluding to the fact that he is a victim, but a victim of what? Of a stranger not wanting to hear his speech? I don't think he was harmed in the making of this joke or thread.

I can't speak for religious bashing on E because I avoid religious discussions and threads. However, this is not religious bashing, she has not said a single thing against the religion. It seems that way because only a select few religious organizations preach on the streets, however, the problem isn't the religion or it's beliefs, and it has everything to do with the fact that people don't like random strangers approaching them with those beliefs.

If you were completely against gay rights, would you want gays to continually approach you and try to convince you otherwise? Or vise versa, if you are for gay rights, would you like someone to keep approaching you, telling you all the reasons you are wrong?

She didn't bash him for his beliefs, she simply stopped him from preaching them. In a way that didn't harm him OR his beliefs. This isn't making him a victim.

[Cyrano Johnson]

Would her comment have been funny if the person was attempting to have her sign a pamphlet for abortion rights, gay rights, environmental causes, etc etc.?  Would I suddenly have humor impediment if that was not found to be funny by me? 

People aren't ignoring this comparison because they just aren't getting it, Pumpkin. It is false. It is a wrong comparison. That's why it isn't working. Repeating it with escalating frustration will not change that.

[Pumpkin Seeds]

I didn’t allude; I stated he is a victim.   And no this doesn’t have anything to do with him specifically being Mormon other than people’s jokes about Mormons that followed her post.  This has everything to do with him being viewed as religious.  He did not even share his views or preach any belief to her.  Once more if he had come up to talk about any other belief that was non-religious then this incident wouldn’t have occurred or at the very least she wouldn’t be here bragging.  Also she didn’t just stop him from preaching; she went further and purposefully made a joke out of him in front of her friend.  She set out to ridicule him and then considered it funny enough to continue the ridicule on a forum site.

As for people approaching me against gay rights, I don’t agree with them and certainly I get annoyed being interrupted.  At the same time I wouldn’t consider this my place or anyone else’s to mark them out for ridicule.  They have the right to speak just as I have the right to say, I don’t want to hear this and walk away. 

Also Cyrano, if what I’m stating is false then please tell me how this is a false comparison.  One person preaching a religious view point and another preaching a non-religious view point, yet one deserves ridicule and the other does not.  Be my guest to explain why religion gets signaled out.

[Shjade]

It isn't because he's viewed as religious, it's because he's anticipated to proselytize.

Your comparison is flawed because the factions with which you are making comparisons don't, in general, go out recruiting random people to join their cause. There are ads for support in general, but you won't see people going door to door to give people lectures on the merits of gay marriage, for instance.

Rather, if you want to make a comparison of a non-religious group getting this kind of treatment, a more sensible one would be telemarketers: they call you at home unsolicited to try to sell you things you very likely don't want or care to hear about.

[Oniya]

'Hey, baby, what's your sign?'

'Do not enter.'

[Pumpkin Seeds]

Well that is false Shjade.  There was recently a piece on NPR about a group for gay marriage going door-to-door to garner support in each state to begin passing laws.  I, myself, participated in a door-to-door activity to promote clean air with carbon fume reduction engines when I was in college.  I have had several people knock on my door since moving into this neighborhood to talk to me about everything from gay rights to school loans.  Oddly enough a religious spokesman has never approached my doorstep.  So I find that rationale into my comparison being wrong to be false at its foundation.  There are non-religious organizations that go door-to-door to solicit support and engage people of differing opinion.  Just wait till an election season.

And no, if you read her post it pretty blatantly states that he looked Mormon and she was prepared to make fun of him for her friend.

[Serephino]

He looked Mormon, yes.  Then he opened his mouth and removed all doubt.  That part you seem to conveniently forget.  As for your comparison, I've heard people brag about doing similar things to sales people, which really is much more similar, and other people laughed.  They are intrusive, and annoying as all hell.  No one who had been ear raped by a Mormon who wouldn't take 'shut up and go away' for an answer is going to see this guy as a victim.  They are hellbent on saving your soul whether you like it or not. 

Also, I don't like it when anyone knocks on my door to try to convince me of something.  In my state you can choose your electric supplier, and those people call me and annoy the crap out of me.  Would I do the same to one of them?  If I could think of something clever, yes. 

[Braioch]

If I could think of something clever, yes. 

Ha!

(Sorry, been haunting the thread rather than responding due to the frustratingly cyclical nature of the discussion, but that truly made me snort, kudos Sereph)

[gaggedLouise]

It isn't because he's viewed as religious, it's because he's anticipated to proselytize.

Your comparison is flawed because the factions with which you are making comparisons don't, in general, go out recruiting random people to join their cause. There are ads for support in general, but you won't see people going door to door to give people lectures on the merits of gay marriage, for instance.

This, so this.

Rather, if you want to make a comparison of a non-religious group getting this kind of treatment, a more sensible one would be telemarketers: they call you at home unsolicited to try to sell you things you very likely don't want or care to hear about.

"Eh, thanks, but I buy all my underwear in London" is one I slipped to a telemarketer calling at 8 p.m. wanting to sell "subscribed underwear",  that means boxers and panties a package every two months.  ;) The UK is some way from here, but it worked as a stopper line.

[Oniya]

Also, I don't like it when anyone knocks on my door to try to convince me of something.  In my state you can choose your electric supplier, and those people call me and annoy the crap out of me.  Would I do the same to one of them?  If I could think of something clever, yes. 

Tell them you're going geothermal as soon as the paperwork goes through.  If they ask how, ask them if they've heard of Centralia and nod knowingly.

[Shjade]

Well that is false Shjade.  There was recently a piece on NPR about a group for gay marriage going door-to-door to garner support in each state to begin passing laws.  I, myself, participated in a door-to-door activity to promote clean air with carbon fume reduction engines when I was in college.  I have had several people knock on my door since moving into this neighborhood to talk to me about everything from gay rights to school loans.  Oddly enough a religious spokesman has never approached my doorstep.  So I find that rationale into my comparison being wrong to be false at its foundation.  There are non-religious organizations that go door-to-door to solicit support and engage people of differing opinion.  Just wait till an election season.

Okay, in that case, for those specific groups, if they came to my door and were insistent on going through their spiel even after I said, "Not interested," I might give them a stinger as well before I shut the door, just like I would for anyone who's bothering me at home unasked. Because frankly, at that point, I don't care what your cause is, they're all equally bothersome.

Would I feel a need to make some public post about how clever I was at their expense? Probably not, no. But then, I'm clever at other people's expense all the time; if I stopped to post about every instance of it I'd never have time to be clever at the expense of even more people.

[Rogue]

The difference being forgotten is location. When my roommate answers the phone she says, "Roadkill Cafe, you kill them we grill them, could I have your order?" to get rid of most telemarketers. When there are people I don't know on my porch I can tell them to go away, have done so many times before. When someone approaches me at a bus stop when I'm waiting for a bus, I can't leave until they go away. Well I could, but it would mean me missing my bus. Therefore, clever comeback. If a Pro/Anti abortion person came up to me with a pamphlet, I simply say "No thank you", because declining a pamphlet is EASIER than declining to talk to a person. It's not seen as rude. Declining to talk to someone, especially people as persistent as most religious people are (especially ones  that harass people at bus stops) is difficult. Much better to ask them if they believe in another Mythological creature. This either, opens up a clever debate or shuts down the conversation. That he handled it so awkwardly is his own fault and therefor the joke.

I just thought it was clever that she didn't say, "I can save 15 percent or more by switching to Geiko???" and made a relevant joke.

[Cyrano Johnson]

Also Cyrano, if what I’m stating is false then please tell me how this is a false comparison.

I already did in my first reply to you a couple of pages back. But I shan't repeat it, as I see I've been pre-empted by other, better arguments in the meantime.

[TaintedAndDelish]

Here's a new spin on the topic. If some stranger came up to you all starry eyed and tried to bait you with some corny catch phrase or question in order to ultimately tell you about how the world was flat, would you not laugh at him for being so horribly misinformed?

Its not the same a laughing at someone for being mentally retarded or for making a simple mistake. These religious folks, presumably of average intelligence, have been duped into believing all sorts of ridiculousness. I mean nonsense that requires you to depart with logic in order to believe. When they approach with their spiel, I'm sorry, but its comical.

If you try to convince me that the planet Niribu is about to crash into the earth, that the world will end on some kooky date like 2012, or that you can fly but may not show me out of humility or something, you WILL be laughed at.

[Iniquitous]

Here’s the difference between you and I Tainted.

I am tolerant and respectful. You are not.

I am secure enough in my beliefs that I do not feel the need to ridicule someone else for theirs or for practicing what they believe (which witnessing is something Christians believe in). I am compassionate enough that I do not want to hurt those around me just because of their beliefs. I find no pleasure in ridiculing others. I find no joy in other people’s embarrassment/pain/suffering.

I actually believe in being not only friendly to those of opposing beliefs but in being hospitable to them. I find that being kind goes a lot farther than being immature, nasty and rude.

It actually disturbs me to see so many intolerant people around here. And yes, it is intolerance when you can’t live and let live. Disagree with others, but keep it civil. Don’t seek to embarrass/harass/ridicule/hurt others just for your own personal amusement.

[Cyrano Johnson]

I find no joy in other people’s embarrassment/pain/suffering.

It's "suffering" to encounter a mild joke, now?

Listen to yourself. To hear you talk you would think this poor guy had been sexually assaulted or something. This is just wildly and completely over-the-top. It's the kind of rhetorical overreach that cheapens actual suffering.

(I don't much care for Whiggish rhetoric about religion being "ridiculousness" either. [Sorry, Tainted.] But come on, you're going to have to come to terms with the fact that other people in the world make jokes. I find it incredible that this news is giving you such a case of the vapors.)

[Braioch]

I'm with Cyrano on this one.

Honestly it isn't as if she pants the man and proceeded to mock him for his faith in God. She deflected the man's attempts at engaging her in a discussion she did not want to have with humor. She did not ridicule him, she did not mock him, she made whimsy. Some want to mention that there is a lot of disrespect for religion around here, despite the fact that I have seen a majority of respect for other religions on here, and yet, what the definition of disrespect seems to be getting wider and wider everyday. A completely innocent joke to deflect what would have been a very long winded and well rehearsed speech about god and the saving of a soul, has now turned the OP into someone who ridiculed and defamed?

I'm sorry...what?

Oh, and we're no longer allowed to view a belief as ridiculous?

Really?

-ponders that-

Because frankly, if someone were to tell you that they believed a god of cupcakes would one day descend and rain happy cake and pies upon the earth for those who did its bidding, you would find it ridiculous. Just because your beliefs have been around for awhile doesn't make them immune to others finding them ridiculous. If you guys are so secure in the belief that your beliefs aren't ridiculous, than by all means, one person saying they are shouldn't matter. I personally find them ludicrous, hell I find my previous beliefs in the afterlife ludicrous, does me looking askance at my past self for believing make me disrespectful?

Where do we get to draw the line between critically looking at something and being disrespectful? Where's the point where logic and rationality get to have a say and question things without being called rude or disrespectful?

[kylie]

Here’s the difference between you and I Tainted.

I am tolerant and respectful. You are not.

I am secure enough in my beliefs that I do not feel the need to ridicule someone else for theirs or for practicing what they believe (which witnessing is something Christians believe in). I am compassionate enough that I do not want to hurt those around me just because of their beliefs. I find no pleasure in ridiculing others. I find no joy in other people’s embarrassment/pain/suffering.

I actually believe in being not only friendly to those of opposing beliefs but in being hospitable to them. I find that being kind goes a lot farther than being immature, nasty and rude.

Maybe I am missing something, but to me this sounds rather unnecessary if not mean.  At the least, it's turning into a retort of "Oh, but I'm really offended at what you did!  So I must be right about the whole, original issue!"  Are you really trying to say that calling someone worse than "immature, nasty, and rude" is an example of how you are morally required to be "friendly" to everyone of different beliefs, whatever stripe?  That is how that post comes off to me, and you know, I'm not feeling it.  Now moving on already , what of the reasons you claim for your offense?  You just said hospitality requires you to deal with everyone nicely.  Okay, whatever does that mean then?  That defends on how you define civil and hospitable.  Wherever is there a border between being reasonably civil and getting on with living your life and pursuing your own private goals, space, and time?  I'll argue that if in fact there is a border, then hey, people are going to pick some fun at things that get in their way.

    The assumption that picking fun at a person's platform automatically  means personal insecurity does not weigh up for me.  People do not only make light of things because those things disturb a core belief somehow; they also sometimes make light of things they cannot easily change but find to be impractical, and detrimental to a good life.  If you say planting hedge rows on my lawn is something you believe is morally imperative and I can do nothing to stop you without assaulting you (or some other act either illegal or against my standards), then it's your problem if you're offended by my dry humor about that situation...   I'm doing the best I can, under the circumstances.  Are you suggesting that just to be civil, I should instead stand quietly "observing" and perhaps trying to learn from your position all afternoon, while you go on taking over my lawn?

...Likewise, we may not be able to push the Mormons away from our doorsteps immediately without hurting them or saying very threatening things to them (they stand as far inside as possible, the ones that have visited me -- a case of give a civil inch, lose a private mile).  We can't stop them from repeating the same line day in day out, no.  They can walk through public space (unless we live in gated communities -- and I wonder how many Mormons prefer to?) and knock on people's doors.  But we can poke fun at it and try to make it more interesting, since they're placing demands upon our time and attention anyway.  It's our time too, and they wanted to talk to us. 

If you want to toss around that whoever complained must be intolerant by default, then why aren't they "tolerant" enough to take a joke?  Is their religion, or their public dignity really so fragile that one dry joke from someone who is bombarded with their messages as a matter of course, is all it takes that you're offended?  Why, in that regard I would say that organized, "Of the Book" sort religions have a whole lot of political capital in the US, whereas private citizens -- particularly those living in rented apartments with easy public access in densely populated areas, where it is simple and efficient for the evangelists to go door to door -- have very little weight with big political outfits, tax breaks, etc. at all.  It's much easier for them to impose upon me (at least in the US or Japan), than the other way around.   

      We're talking about the Mormon church, whose proselytizers are sometimes known for returning again and again, on a regular basis -- regardless of whether it is breakfast or dinner hour (and here it might just be regardless of a public place where people need to wait for the sake of getting home), regardless of whether others have taken their literature already or not, often regardless of others saying "Thank you, that will be enough for today now please leave." 

     What would "hospitality" require then?  What if I say, okay, if you do not let every campaigner who shows up at your door day in and day out in for an hour's hearing, then you are being rude and intolerant and I can't stand it?  Or, if the same campaign keeps reappearing all around you, maybe 3 or 4 times a week when you have told them "thank you, no" more than once, are you still obligated to thank them for coming and wait until they finally move back far enough that you don't catch their nose with the closing door?  You know, they often don't move back until you have listened to them for at least 15 minutes yet again...   

     As far as the attempt to play "what if" with more liberal and fact-based, or social issue causes (which I do think is an important difference in itself, but anyway):  Perhaps it's historical coincidence that evangelizing religions have gained some political standing and causes such as gay rights do not have the standing to feel comfortable bothering anyone quite this regularly -- or maybe it's more that gay rights champions know they are not likely to convince people in certain demographics and they pick their battles (more often favoring public demonstrations or at least more fence-sitting areas to canvas, etc.) so they don't end up so infamous on that score. 

In any case, I don't think gay rights on the whole is a movement with a similar reputation for persistently attempting to indoctrinate people on their own doorsteps, and particularly when those people have already said more or less directly, "No thank you, now I've noticed you were here and heard why, your turn now, please go away and don't come again.  And if you can't manage that, then certainly not three times in a week."  However, the Mormons to some extent do have the reputation for very persistent advances on private residences, and I believe they have done a good deal to earn it. 

[Iniquitous]

when this Mormon comes to me and my co worker

My first issue - the assumption that the man in question was a Mormon. There is nothing stated to show for fact that the person in question was, in fact, a Mormon. Was it because he was dressed in the slacks, white shirt and tie? That does not mean he was Mormon. If that 'dress code' shows definite proof of being a Mormon then I work in a building full of Mormons. Slacks, white shirt and tie is standard professional business attire. Was he carrying a Book of Mormon? The OP doesn't say. Does the OP live in an area heavily populated by Mormons so that she knows with nothing more than a look who is Mormon and who isn't?

The way this reads it is judging a book by it's cover. Something I find to be distasteful.

we are both atheists so we were not in the mood to hear their we love us some Jesus speel

This statement sets the stage. The assumption was already made of who this man was and what he was going to do. It reads that both the OP and her coworker immediately went on the defensive before the man even opened his mouth. At this point they didn't even know for sure that he was coming over to try and witness to them.

From there it dissolves into her trying to do what she can to make the man uncomfortable and I really do not understand why. Is it that flipping hard to say "Hey, thanks but no thanks. Have a good day!" ? Are so many of us incapable of simply brushing off unwanted attention politely? Yes, I've heard of worse from others. By and far what she did is extremely mild when compared to what others do... but the point remains. It was immature. It was unnecessary. I do not find 'jokes' at the expense of someone else funny. I certainly do not find it humorous that she felt the need to come on here and brag about it. THAT is what gets my goat.  I don't care what you say, seeking approval for judging someone else, making assumptions and trying to make a joke of someone else's beliefs is despicable.

Now then. To answer - Do I think that my opinion on this whole debacle is right? Well, it's my opinion, and the beauty of opinions is... we've all got one that we all think is right. As my father has always said, opinions are like assholes. Everyone has one. The reason I am posting my opinion? For the simple hope that maybe, just maybe, the next time something like this comes up someone would actually stop and think before adopting the defensive attitude and seeking to make fun of someone else & their belief. Not a one of you can tell me that the simple phrase "No thank you." is too hard to say.

You just said hospitality requires you to deal with everyone nicely.  Okay, whatever does that mean then?

It means that I give of myself. My time, my home, my food, my drink. Whatever I have that someone else may be in need of. If someone approaches me and wants to witness I give of myself - in such a case it would be my time. I strive very hard to be open and friendly, I'll even sit and talk with them if I have the time. Why? One, I find it fascinating what other people believe. Two, because I believe in giving of myself. If I do not have time or I am simple not in the mood to hear it a simple "Thank you but no thanks" works wonderfully. I have never in my 40 years had anyone witnessing for Christianity/Mormonism/what have you persist after politely and firmly stating "thank you but no thanks". I actually, from my personal experience, find your assertion that the ALL Mormons invade doorways and hold everyone hostage to be nothing more than silliness. I've never had these kind of experiences. If nothing else I've had very polite Mormons - they don't crowd my doorway, they don't force their conversations and I've never had a pair show back up after telling them no thanks. Hell, I have freaking groups wanting me to sign polls and crap returning over and over and over. Not Mormons.

What would "hospitality" require then?

Already answered.

[Braioch]

So because you give your time so freely to people because you find other's beliefs interesting, you expect the same of others?

And whether or not he is a Mormon isn't really the point, considering it's already been pointed out that no one starts a conversation with 'have you heard the good word' unless they're trying to discuss Jesus. This has been addressed time and time again and yet it keeps being brought up. She may have initially judged him, or she may have added that into the story for flair. Either way, it was confirmed, and then even more so when he decided to bring heaven into it with his stammering reply.

As for why it's so 'flipping' hard to say 'no thank you,' this too has been addressed before. One's patience can only go so far, especially if you deal with it frequently enough to have your patience worn thin. You seem to expect perfect poise and patience with someone intruding upon others time with their selling point, while ironically aggressively attacking someone else for their behavior. Sorry, not everyone finds these things as interesting as you claim too, and how you have managed to not find one pushy one is beyond me, considering I have experienced far too many of them.

What gets me about all of this is that you're acting as if she publicly mocked and ridiculed him. Which if that is your true belief, you obviously haven't been mocked or ridiculed publicly before, because you would know that this is not the case. For what would be the hundredth time by now, she took a potentially irritating situation and made light of it, she did not mock him, she did not commit a cruelty upon him. His faith was not injured, he was taken off guard, there is a difference.

[Rogue]

I was ninja'd and found his explanation more eloquent than mine. I leave you with this story instead...

A player walked up to me and my coworker today. I told her I'd handle this. He asked me, "Did it hurt?" I immediately responded, wide eyed in fear. "How did you know??" He was startled and said "W-what?" I bit my lip and looked down, obviously scared as my coworker glares at him picking up on the joke. "She doesn't want to talk about it." The scared and startled look on his face as he walked away was priceless!

Okay: There were clues not given that he was a player. I could have just assumed or there could be clues that weren't included because they were superfluous for the joke. I didn't tolerate him and say, "I'm sorry but my friend and I are talking." I made a joke instead and laughed at his expense. He could have been smooth about it and said, "How could you be anything other than an Angel?" but he was thrown off by it instead. I laughed about it. Is there any difference to the scene besides one was religious and one was a player? I don't think so unless someone can point it out for me. :)

[Cyrano Johnson]

My first issue - the assumption that the man in question was a Mormon.

It doesn't seem to me to matter that much. I'm assuming the joke would've been the same if he was a Jehovah's Witness. You're trying to talk it up like some horrible form of profiling happened here: as a matter of fact there are about two or three different sects who do street proselytization, their missionaries are fairly visually identifiable, Mormons happen to be the largest such group and her speculation wasn't out of line. At the very most you can make a case that she should have said "probable Mormon."

This statement sets the stage. The assumption was already made of who this man was and what he was going to do.

Which in fact he did, because it was a correct and reasonable assumption. There's really no getting around that. And like anyone minding their own business on the street, they had every right to not be in the mood to hear his spiel. There's really no getting around that either.

From there it dissolves into her trying to do what she can to make the man uncomfortable

From there it goes to her making. a. joke. Which you apparently want to pretend is a horrible shocking act worthy of the death chambers of Auschwitz, but in fact is just not. It is actually a regular everyday thing that people do. Making jokes. Sometimes we even rib one another, for humorous effect. That happens. One might suggest that to go around reeling in shock and horror every time someone reports it happening is an unhealthy and counterproductive attitude. One might even suggest that after working oneself up into a froth of indignation over basically nothing, one's standing to then complain about other people's supposed intolerance rather suffers.

You're right: we do all get to have our own opinions and think they are correct. We just don't all get to actually be correct.

[Cyrano Johnson]

I was ninja'd and found his explanation more eloquent than mine. I leave you with this story instead...

A player walked up to me and my coworker today. I told her I'd handle this. He asked me, "Did it hurt?" I immediately responded, wide eyed in fear. "How did you know??" He was startled and said "W-what?" I bit my lip and looked down, obviously scared as my coworker glares at him picking up on the joke. "She doesn't want to talk about it." The scared and startled look on his face as he walked away was priceless!

That is a thing of beauty. Bravo.  O8)

[TaintedAndDelish]

Here’s the difference between you and I Tainted.
I am tolerant and respectful. You are not.

Are you tolerant of me too or just tolerant in general?

I am secure enough in my beliefs that I do not feel the need to ridicule someone else for theirs or for practicing what they believe (which witnessing is something Christians believe in).

If I do ridicule someone for acting like a moron, I assure you, its not out of insecurity.  If anything, it would be frustration or annoyance.

"Witnessing" is when Christians try to dupe other people into believing their ideology. From what I have seen to date, this is typically done with misinformation, false logic, and sometimes manipulation. I see no merit in this at all.

I am compassionate enough that I do not want to hurt those around me just because of their beliefs. I find no pleasure in ridiculing others. I find no joy in other people’s embarrassment/pain/suffering.

So I have a bit of a mean streak, oh well.

I do have some level of compassion and would not necessarily resort ridicule right away. If however, this was an annoying door to door preacher, or if someone rubbed me the wrong way with their condescending "are you saved?" line of questioning, then yes, I might act upon an urge to strip them naked verbally and send them home questioning their belief system. I typically start with a "no thanks", and then sharpen my responses gradually as needed.

I actually believe in being not only friendly to those of opposing beliefs but in being hospitable to them.

I have no problem entertaining a religious topic with a religious person. The moment they start talking nonsense, I choose whether to just let it go or debate with them. More often, I let it go - especially if its a friend. Most religious folks that I've spoken with can't handle truth when it contradicts with their religion - and in my opinion, it's not their fault.

I find that being kind goes a lot farther than being immature, nasty and rude.

Sometimes kindness is ineffective. When it is, sometimes curt, rude and nasty work.

It actually disturbs me to see so many intolerant people around here. And yes, it is intolerance when you can’t live and let live. Disagree with others, but keep it civil. Don’t seek to embarrass/harass/ridicule/hurt others just for your own personal amusement.

There are a lot of terribly smart folks on this forum. It does not surprise me at all to see a high level of intolerance towards BS.

[Rogue]

"Witnessing" is when Christians try to dupe other people into believing their ideology. From what I have seen to date, this is typically done with misinformation, false logic, and sometimes manipulation. I see no merit in this at all.

As an add-on, there's the whole, tolerate me and I'll tolerate you thing that "Witnessing" kinda throws out the window...

[kylie]

     Yeah, fine, I think I may have confused the Mormons with the Jehovah's Witnesses.  But it appears that others have experiences of being persistently approached despite polite refusals by Mormons (more definitely than me anyway -- I'm at the point where I can barely keep them straight as their initial approaches have gone toward me).  Anyway, the principle is much the same to me.  After a string of evangelists comes after me seeking my subscription to their good news, I really don't have patience for another case of the same conversation about something intended to push me toward something I really don't subscribe to, and something that they will be that interested in dragging out. 

     Even a relatively civil conversation where I say, oh I'm a little more sympathetic to pagan things, which leaves them with a face-saving sort of "Well, at least this one seems open to the idea of a/some god(s)," tends to drag on interminably.  I have told them over and over it doesn't do anything for me to go there, and they keep asking me questions and probing and not backing away from the door even when I have hinted, "You know I really have to go now."  Or following me along the street attempting to continue the conversation while I've said "no thank you, I don't want to talk about that kind of thing now," and I'm really wanting to think about the next part of my day, walking faster and faster and getting sweaty trying to get them to back off.

     So after a few of these in a month, I really don't care exactly what church or sect or specific doctrine they are.  They sound like Of the big bad follow this or go to hell style Book (whatever, as far as I'm concerned at that point) evangelists, some evangelists don't back off (you may notice at one point I did say "some"), and I don't have time and interest to process this mess at my door or in public space, if I can help it. 

     Now, Iniq, you can say whatever you like is being civil and hospitable, whether it's 5 minutes or a whole day of my time with cookies and bed and a seminary exchange in my own house -- whatever floats your boat.  But if I don't agree with  you on that standard, then I'm not going to think you are being "friendly" when you tell me that to do otherwise is mean or rude.  Instead, I am going to think you are sounding rather paternalistic and bothersome.  You may call it friendly, but some of us find it downright creepy.  To me "civil" society ends where it becomes this difficult to protect your own private space and time.  There, I say there's nothing civil about what you're asking of people -- unless I assume that you want to force them to change their whole view of society, and you think it's uncivil and rude if they don't give over just what you want to whoever in the name of doing that. 

     By the way, if all the Mormons or the Jehovahs or whoever evangelical actually did was show up with a petition, yes or no, and they all went away in a quick minute predictably, I might actually be willing to say yes or no and be done with them.  Then at least, it would be on paper who they are and what they want done in the world, not some vague endless babble about the end of the world and how I should come to their church and oh, don't I believe their pastor's position on this, oh how about that?  At least a couple times a week.  But that's not the way evangelists operate in my experience.  These often don't back off nicely, though I bet they enjoy you if you let them in for tea and give them an hour, and maybe (given your consistent use of the word "witness") tell them you already believed some things they do anyway.  They're evangelists!

[Tsenta]

Honestly...all this 'holier than thou' stuff...over a joke. You need to understand that humor and sarcasm are better ways to deal with someone petitioning you on the street than say hostility. I'm sure the guy was far from humiliated, or insulted. He puts himself in the line of fire so to speak likely on a daily basis and has likely dealt with worse.

Long story short, jokes aren't meant to be taken seriously and a few here do just that.

[Braioch]

Honestly...all this 'holier than thou' stuff...over a joke. You need to understand that humor and sarcasm are better ways to deal with someone petitioning you on the street than say hostility. I'm sure the guy was far from humiliated, or insulted. He puts himself in the line of fire so to speak likely on a daily basis and has likely dealt with worse.

Long story short, jokes aren't meant to be taken seriously and a few here do just that.

-flops- This is one of the many points that have been attempted to be made around here.

From there it goes to her making. a. joke. Which you apparently want to pretend is a horrible shocking act worthy of the death chambers of Auschwitz, but in fact is just not. It is actually a regular everyday thing that people do. Making jokes. Sometimes we even rib one another, for humorous effect. That happens. One might suggest that to go around reeling in shock and horror every time someone reports it happening is an unhealthy and counterproductive attitude. One might even suggest that after working oneself up into a froth of indignation over basically nothing, one's standing to then complain about other people's supposed intolerance rather suffers.

You're right: we do all get to have our own opinions and think they are correct. We just don't all get to actually be correct.

One might think you are talking about someone you know rather well ::)

[Sethala]

The difference being forgotten is location. When my roommate answers the phone she says, "Roadkill Cafe, you kill them we grill them, could I have your order?" to get rid of most telemarketers.

You can also try "Stephen's Mortuary, you stab 'em we slab 'em, how can I help you?"

[Beorning]

I just wanted to say that I agree with Pumpkin and Inquisitous O on what they are saying. The OP's message does seem to be a bit on the gloating side: "Haha, look how I made a fool out of a silly religious person"... I, for once, don't find it funny.

The analogy to telemarketers was raised. Well, telemarketers don't deserve to be the subject of jokes, either. It's an awful, stressful job - and when people shout at you or make fun of you, it's double stressful. So no, you shouldn't be making jokes of telemarketers, either...

[Braioch]

I...

-sighs-

It has been pointed out...I'm not even going to attempt to count how many times...the joke was not an attempt to mock or ridicule the man. It was utilizing the use of humor to deflect an irritating situation away from occurring. The humor lay in the juxtaposition of a unicorn in regards to a deity and an afterlife with a touch of amusement at his being taken off guard. I highly doubt that the man's faith felt injured as I'm pretty sure anyone bold enough to approach someone about their faith is confident enough that said belief wasn't fazed in the least by the 'absurdity' of her comment.

(I'm so throwing up my hands and giving up if all we do in this thread is repeat arguments and counter-arguments)

[Beorning]

Well, one could say that juxtaposing a deity with an unicorn is a bit offensive, actually. Religion is a serious matter and unicorn are, well... unicorns. Is it really that hard to tell a religious person "I'm not interested in taking, thank you"? I've done it many times and I've never had any problem with that...

Also, aside from the joke itself, OP's coming here and posting about it does feel like a form of gloating...

[Cyrano Johnson]

Strictly-speaking, as I said upfront, it is not the nicest possible thing to do on a scale of 0 - 1000 kittens-cuddling-a-cupcake. Humour is not always necessarily nice, in part because -- as has been pointed out by various parties -- people (like the OP) are often using it as an outlet to vent anger or frustration. If all you want to say is, "hey, you know, bit dickish and maybe not as funny as you thought it was," have at it.

It just isn't worth the pitch of fainting-couch pearl-clutching oh-the-humanity-have-you-people-no-souls nonsense that occurred in this ridonkulous thread. If you're agreeing with that, sir, you and I shall to step outside in order that I can slap with you the flank of an halibut.  People who go into endeavours that involve bothering the public -- and if you're in sales, and if you're in missionary work, that's your job -- had better have a sense of humour, point blank. It's a necessary part of the job, because sometimes humour becomes a necessity for the people you're bothering. I've been a telemarketer, I've been a cold-caller, and I can tell you right now I'd far rather encounter a joke than many of the alternatives in doing that work; I have little doubt that missionaries feel the same way. So don't someone come to me and talk to me about the "suffering" the OP caused -- life is suffering, and humour is generally speaking the mildest possible form of it.

(EDIT: Oh goodness, I missed a golden opportunity for the Princess Bride reference there: "Life is suffering, Highness! Anyone who tells you different is selling something." Missed... chance at... pop-culture... reference... must... throw myself... on... sword... like that guy... said... in Serenity...)

[Imogen]

I hardly doubt the 'victim' is any worse for wear after this OMG I ROCKX I WAS SO FUNNY LOLLOLOLZ bit of amazing humor. Does that mean I think this is post worthy? Not moreso than the average farts people post on their facebook, which where this amazing story of wowwozors I was rude in public LOLLOL, in my humble opinion, belongs. (Under the caveat of 'if this amazing Monty Python-esque (don't shoot me, fans!) blurb of memorable humor should have been shared with us poor readers in the first place').

[Braioch]

Well, one could say that juxtaposing a deity with an unicorn is a bit offensive, actually. Religion is a serious matter and unicorn are, well... unicorns. Is it really that hard to tell a religious person "I'm not interested in taking, thank you"? I've done it many times and I've never had any problem with that...

Also, aside from the joke itself, OP's coming here and posting about it does feel like a form of gloating...

Ahh see, this is where we hit the murky territory that amuses me to no end.

See, there is no difference between unicorns and religion, (well the mythology behind it anyways) well at least to me. Might be different to you, but as has been pointed out before, differing opinions exist. That's the best part about adding unicorns to this mix that makes me snicker, is that it seems so bloody offensive to people with belief. Because, well how dare you compare God to an imaginary creature? Yeah well, prove their imaginary, just like I get told to prove that God isn't real. In other words, turnabout=fair play.

Also, are we really going to sit here and pretend that a person's religion is so sacred, so above reproach and question, that is above a light joke?

Lastly, it'd be more gloating if she had slapped it into the G&C, whereas she put it into the PROC, which probably means she wanted some discussion on the matter. Of course I don't think she expected the drastic overreaction that has flooded this thread to the point of being utterly ridiculous, but that's what happens when you come into the PROC section. Also, gloating? Really? Is that what telling a story you find amusing and put up for discussion becomes?

Apparently humor is not only mocking and ridicule, but gloating as well?

Interesting.

@Cyrano: ....flank of a halibut? -snorts-

[kylie]

     Okay, this is sort of living down to my understanding that American conservatives (or particularly, the religious right that makes up an influential chunk of them lately) have no tolerance or capacity for humor, particularly when the joke is on their position.  It starts to remind me of those Iranians who can't stand having a few cartoons about Mohammed out there anywhere, and have to resort to criminalizing humor (and images of people, period even) to toe their own line.  But anyway...   

     The US, right?  It's more or less still a free country.  I think (though there are some areas where I have my doubts)...  So if you think mocking an idea itself, or mocking the notion of someone in effect demanding the right to proselytize to strangers (which many seem to do with such an opening, regardless of this specific case) is unacceptable, then you need to go find a still greater, more actual theocracy than the historical advantages and biases of major religions in the US have managed to carve out .  Considerable though the weight of those biases and conventions (and certain chunks of the South in particular pushing them rather hard) can be.       

The analogy to telemarketers was raised. Well, telemarketers don't deserve to be the subject of jokes, either. It's an awful, stressful job - and when people shout at you or make fun of you, it's double stressful. So no, you shouldn't be making jokes of telemarketers, either...

Telemarketers?  Actually, I did market research by telephone for some months and I encountered lots of people upset at being called -- and these were mostly people who had dealt with the companies offering the surveys before (or their relatives), not totally unrelated parties!  Plenty of them made nasty remarks or simply hung up or tried to distract me into unrelated conversation or sometimes, picked fun at the survey process. 

And you know what?  I wasn't particularly offended.  I just took it in stride as part of the job of dialing unfamiliar people at some random time in their life.  If one was bitchy, I could just hang up right away and dial another one.  (Think: Hmm, Mr. Mormon could easily walk away and find someone else to offer the news.  Doesn't God want to give everyone a chance.  Or did your church give you a quota to bring into the congregation next Sunday, if the comparison is to a job?   Well then, better hurry up and keep playing the numbers til you find someone amicable.) 

There are plenty of fish in the sea, and a few like to answer surveys (maybe a few even like to talk about a new product, if you're only marketing).  Quite a few don't.  Big deal.  I don't consider it a personal attack, and I've hung up on plenty of unwanted phone calls myself.  It was one of the easier jobs I've done -- I sat there reading off a script to those people who wanted to answer it, and happily ignored the rest.  So the assumption that a telemarketer has to be personally damaged by brusque or snide responses, totally does not hold water for me.

     Lots of jobs (or lifestyles, or interest groups) can be stressful.  That's no good reason why those who find humor to help reduce tension should have to give it up.  "Hey, Secret Service, I know you've got things you want to get done too, but no pointing out it's ironic that the killer attacked Congress on a day when no one was in the office.  He might get offended!  How dare you?"  What???

[Kythia]

I hardly doubt the 'victim' is any worse for wear after this OMG I ROCKX I WAS SO FUNNY LOLLOLOLZ bit of amazing humor. Does that mean I think this is post worthy? Not moreso than the average farts people post on their facebook, which where this amazing story of wowwozors I was rude in public LOLLOL, in my humble opinion, belongs. (Under the caveat of 'if this amazing Monty Python-esque (don't shoot me, fans!) blurb of memorable humor should have been shared with us poor readers in the first place').

QFT

She made some nonsense comment about unicorns and then ran away with her friend, presumably giggling.  If this guy remembers it at all its probably in terms of "idiot" rather than "rude person who shook my faith to the core".  I tend to fall on Cyrano et al's side of the argument in general, but in this case it shouldn't have been posted.  It's just childish.  Had her rejoinder been actually funny then sure, but in this case?  Meh.

[Cyrano Johnson]

I hardly doubt the 'victim' is any worse for wear after this OMG I ROCKX I WAS SO FUNNY LOLLOLOLZ bit of amazing humor. Does that mean I think this is post worthy? Not moreso than the average farts people post on their facebook, which where this amazing story of wowwozors I was rude in public LOLLOL, in my humble opinion, belongs. (Under the caveat of 'if this amazing Monty Python-esque (don't shoot me, fans!) blurb of memorable humor should have been shared with us poor readers in the first place').

See, now this points us to what this thread could have been: "could you have found a funnier way to deal with this situation"? Ah, the road not taken. (I mean, I personally think I could do a pretty convincing excited-cokehead response to "Have you heard the Good News?" along the lines of a "Yeah, it's down to sixty a gram isn't that awesome?!, do you got any connects I think I know a guy over on first street but I don't know-him know-him you know" style of running patter. Funnier? Dorkier? You decide!)

[Cyrano Johnson]

Okay, this is sort of living down to my understanding that American conservatives (or particularly, the religious right that makes up a good chunk of them lately) have no tolerance or capacity for humor

Just FYI, Beorning is in Poland.

And Beorning, I get what you're saying about cases where people actually-in-seriousness say they think God is the equivalent of a unicorn. That's weak. "Juxtaposing" an unexpected thing with religion, though? That's just how humour works. If you want that not to happen you're essentially asking that nobody joke about religion ever, which is a standard unacceptable even to many religious.

[Beorning]

Just FYI, Beorning is in Poland.

Yeah, I'm not an American conservative. I'm Polish... something. I honestly don't know what, as my views seem to be all over the place  ;D

And Beorning, I get what you're saying about cases where people actually-in-seriousness say they think God is the equivalent of a unicorn. That's weak. "Juxtaposing" an unexpected thing with religion, though? That's just how humour works. If you want that not to happen you're essentially asking that nobody joke about religion ever, which is a standard unacceptable even to many religious.

Maybe. I don't know, I could well be too sensitive. It's just that when I've read the OP's message, I was like "Hey, that's a bit rude". Purely subjective emotional reaction, I'll give you that.

On the other hand, I wouldn't want to gang up on the OP, either...

[kylie]

Just FYI, Beorning is in Poland.

I do keep forgetting that.  Not really sure if it is material, though.  The study I have read was I believe about American conservatives, but this sort of argument treating dry humor about evangelist positions as insulting, etc. appears to follow the same sort of general pattern. 

Maybe it's something about religious or political affiliation that transcends particular national boundaries.  There are some particular issues where certain positions are not labeled "liberal" or "conservative" in precisely the same way, but there can be some comparable trends all the same.  In short, I do still wonder.

[Pumpkin Seeds]

I think she put the comment in the Politics and Religion section due to the religion bashing that does go on here.  She knew that support would be garnered from people that enjoy bashing religion, particular a religion of the Christian grouping.  The Good and Cuddly section would indeed have been the appropriate area for her comment if that was to be taken more light heartedly.  People come to this forum with their guard up and their defenses up because well, this is the area where arguments are meant to occur.  Her post left no actual room for discussion.  In truth my complaint was more about the reaction of E to her post, than over what she really did.  To me her comment is self-evidently immature and childish; my problem was over her gaining support for bragging and E’s double standard.

As for American conservatives, I am from the United States of America but I am not a conservative. 

[Braioch]

...there was one post for someone to say 'heh that was amusing.' Followed by a few more who found it amusing, found the humor in the situation and expressed such.

There was no 'good job, so proud of you, show that religious person how stupid and ridiculous they were.'

No, right out of the gate, the OP was immediately made to look immature and mocking, and then that was built upon, the rest has been a few people trying to point out that it wasn't meant to be overly offensive, mocking or harassing.

So no Pumpkin, this does not get added to this supposed list of religious bashing on E you seem to have collected.

[Kythia]

So no Pumpkin, this does not get added to this supposed list of religious bashing on E you seem to have collected.

Tainted's posts 1, 2, 3 were pretty much religion bashing though

[Braioch]

One person, not the majority.

[kylie]

     Okay, I knew a few people would probably come back complaining about "conservative" but that isn't so much the point.  The point is rather that there is a more or less quantifiable group of people out there, if we look, who have a pretty low tolerance for humor and sarcasm in particular with regard to their social issue positions.  The study happened to focus on political affiliation, but they could presumably have segemented the population in another way, say by religious membership or region or class, whatever and still found such a group. 

    My point remains more to ask, well where is this going?  If no humor is allowed because this or that identity is so socially fragile that its beliefs about deity must be protected from any casual ridicule whatsoever (even in an indirect form such as "Unicorns are Real" which does not even say, gee you know I don't have a lot of scientific proof about this God thing, much less the end of days or all the social policies your particular church might demand while talking so much to me about God on the street and so little about policy issues)... 

And if people are pushing for this, particularly in contexts where a certain set of religions already has a considerable bias of support in certain corners of the political system-- thinking of the US, but I really doubt it's alone...  Then isn't the accusation of "mockery" here something that could be used to push rules in the direction of the Iranian route under Khomeini -- something along the lines of, "No image of the Prophet shall be discussed without Our approval," and violators must be scorned if not prosecuted?  After all, any joke involving a faith might be sacrilege -- or just oh say, rude, intolerant, and uncivil...  But those are words that fired enough times and with enough "righteous outrage" (if I may so characterize Iniq's posts), that people may wish or expect some administrative response.  Which brings me more or less, into the realm of theocracy.

[Cyrano Johnson]

I tried to find a picture of a kitten cuddling a cupcake in order that our healing process could begin, but you know what?

The Intertubes have let me down. No pictures of kittens cuddling cupcakes. *snorts* Rule 34, my black ass.

[Kythia]

I tried to find a picture of a kitten cuddling a cupcake in order that our healing process could begin, but you know what?

The Intertubes have let me down. No pictures of kittens cuddling cupcakes. *snorts* Rule 34, my black ass.

Your google-fu is weak, old man.

[Cyrano Johnson]

SQUEEEEE!

[Pumpkin Seeds]

Supposed?  That is quite a statement.  Considering I am not the only one who has pointed out that members of Elliquiy are hostile toward and biased against people with religious conviction, particularly those of Christian faith.  Even someone that is not religious, like me, finds a bad taste in their mouth with the harsh treatment of religious people.  So if you want to say supposed then quite honestly you are showing yourself to be willfully ignorant of what goes on in this forum or simply uncaring of the presentation.  Either way that sort of makes you ill-suited to decide what might constitute offensive.

I have already broken down the multitude of excuses given by people.  There was also the comment regarding Mormon’s and their underwear, along with a few more jabs at religious people and how they cannot expect to be treated with respect in public.

Well Kylie I would say I complained about conservative and someone else complained that you didn’t assume their country correctly.  To this point your generalization seems a tad faulty so people can complain about the poor assumption made.  As for humor not being allowed, I don’t think that is the point people are making.  There is obviously a double standard here where religion is allowed to be ridiculed but other social issues are discouraged from being treated the same.  Also there is a simple notion of simple respect being offered to another person.  Then there is the issue of coming online to brag about the exploits. 



Weak Cyrano...very weak.  We need to train you better.  And I found that after being at work for..:: checks watch:: 17 hours...

[Cyrano Johnson]

Weak Cyrano...very weak.  We need to train you better.  And I found that after being at work for..:: checks watch:: 17 hours...

Wow. 17 hours?! Those slave-drivers.

That is an immensely cute kitten cuddling a cupcake. In fact I will go so far as to say that nobody could possibly Google a cuter kitten cuddling a cupcake...

[Braioch]

Considering the fact that the only people who have stated that religion is ill treated on E are the same ones creating a fuss over a light joke, I'm a bit ill disposed to giving it credit, especially without any good examples to back it up. And as to what I'm 'showing' myself to be in your view is interesting, considering it again goes back to the bias thing. See, anytime on this site that I have seen this so called 'disrespect' is when religion is called into question, or not taken as 'sacred.' Sorry, that doesn't smack of disrespect, that's called critical thinking in the former example and a different viewpoint of the latter example.

And oh no, another joke?

This ridiculous, yes ridiculous, overreaction to a joke is mind boggling to me, if I were to get offended every time someone made a passing joke about my atheism, I'd be angry often. Honestly, I know more people of faith who make light of their own faith than anyone else typically does, because apparently, if you don't agree with that faith, you can't poke fun at it, or have a joke about it. Interesting how that's turning out.


...and seriously Cyrano, your google-fu is way way weak.

[Cyrano Johnson]

I am usually more in sympathy with Pumpkin on the treatment of religion on E -- just felt she was wrong in this instance -- but kitten with cupcakes make it all better! BOOM! Braioch is the new champine!

[Beorning]

Maybe it's something about religious or political affiliation that transcends particular national boundaries.

Maybe, but I am also an atheist...  ;D So it's not about religious affiliation, either (I think?).

[Braioch]

As I said, a majority of what I've seen has just been people not willing to give religion as wide a berth as it's used to being afforded. That's not disrespect, that's equal treatment.

[Bloodied Porcelain]

I haven't read every single post in this thread and don't intend to, but I have a bad taste in my mouth after reading the first few and last few pages. It seems that those who are jumping up and down about people joking about religion and making light of it, saying that it's "disrespectful" don't really have a healthy view of what actually qualifies as disrespectful or offensive.

Religion, like any other issue from politics, to education, to social views, is deserving of no more respect than anything else out there, and should be treated with a healthy dose of objectivity and critical thinking. It doesn't get a free pass from being joked about or made light of. It doesn't get a free pass from being questioned or criticized. Quite frankly, with the level of power that religion has had over the centuries in terms of law, social constructs, etc... it should be treated with more criticism and questioning than anything else.

It should also be noted that making a harmless joke like "is the good news that unicorns are real?" is not at all on the same level as saying "your faith is moronic and you're an idiot". It's a humorous way to deflect what was likely an incoming attempt at proselytizing, which is invasive and rude. Your faith is your own. If I was interested in it, I'd ask you. Do not presume that you can walk up to a stranger on the street (or anyone, anywhere else) and start talking to them about your faith and not be met with some kind of strong reaction, be it positive or negative. Faith (or lack there of) is a very personal issue, and not everyone is open to discussing it, it's wrong to assume they will be.

Also, it's inherently flawed to compare wanting to talk about your faith with complete strangers and wanting to talk to them about common social issues that effect everyone. Faith is, as I stated before, something personal and your faith has no effect on anyone else, which is why you're free to chose and worship as you wish. Social issues like gay marriage, gun control, possible war, etc are things that literally have an effect on everyone, because they have to do with laws and policies that effect and influence society and day-to-day life of all citizens, regardless of their religion, race, etc. Sure gay marriage might not actually effect you if you're straight, but it has the potential to effect your kids, your friends, your neighbors.

[kylie]

Well Kylie I would say I complained about conservative and someone else complained that you didn’t assume their country correctly.  To this point your generalization seems a tad faulty so people can complain about the poor assumption made.

     When I said the US, right -- there I was assuming that the OP situation happened in the US, actually.  So if you think that was aimed at Beorning, you misunderstood. 

     Again it's immaterial to me at this point whether it's an American conservative per se saying 'no jokes about religion.'  Point remains it seems that there are a fair number of people out there who are averse to jokes about such things, to the point that they attack the very notion of any sarcasm on various issues.  Show me that the same trend is negligible in other countries and I'll say okay, never mind, toss that.  But I hardly expect that you would find no touchy, anti-sarcasm figures in swaths of Europe for example.  Why, Italy is a place where Amanda Knox was tried with all sorts of references to the devil and witchcraft. 

    Now honestly, I think you're drawing out "Oh what did Kylie assume?" a great deal, but in ways that don't really make much difference to the thread and to what I was actually doing with that.
     

There is obviously a double standard here where religion is allowed to be ridiculed but other social issues are discouraged from being treated the same.

I believe this has been discussed.  First of all, we have more evidence at hand what the social issues are about.  Many of us feel that people are more likely to for example, die or suffer economic loss for their gender or sex object preferences than for their lack of knowledge in who knows how many churches' particular platforms?  So if you make light of that in a way that's going to get someone losing a job or killed, yeah, we might have something serious to talk about. 

     But I wouldn't try to tell you that nothing at all could be funny about LGBT or that there is nothing ironic and laughable to find there.  On the contrary, I find lots of things about LGBT (organizations and political groups especially!) really laughable and worthy of being picked on.  But here you are telling me, I gather, that it should be some moral minefield to make any jokes at the expense of people with a religion.  In particular, you're telling me not to do it in a situation where they reasonably appear to be set upon converting someone.  (You could perhaps reduce these trigger situations, and any real misunderstandings, somewhat by finding more interesting and varied ways of speaking to someone besides starting conversations out on Ye Old Goode News.)

     Also, there seems to be a demand for religions to actually be treated more kindly than other people showing with a pitch at some random time in my life.  If I laugh about the New Labor Party showing up at my door at 10 pm, or Toys R Us or Avon for that matter, I'm not allowed to do it for a religion?  Huh?  That's already practically a demand that I treat religion more seriously than others, and I'm not even religious!  Totally unrealistic.  You might as well demand to have no one to want to convert, to begin with.   Or demand that I treat UFO fanatics all completely seriously.  More or less the same to me.   

      Why it would just be a show trial.  The Inquisition at the door:  "Is this one taking us seriously?  Noooo?"  Or once you get this rule implemented: "See you recognized me as important because oh I have FAITH.  Well, I can see eventually I'm going to get your attention because see, you already have.  It's the rule of my lovely theocracy.  You HAVE to take everyone completely seriously.  Especially me, because this is about religion and it's not only a social group, why it's personal and moral.  Don't you agree?  Be careful answering that, now.  Don't smirk."   Thank Goddess and all the spirits and the Sphaghetti Monster and Cthulu and the Altar to Ultimate Agnosticism and My Little Pony and the Tooth Fairy and Lex Luthor the Wannabe Little Satan and all the Lovely Flying Pandas of the Abyss I invented in my 22nd life in -(that's negative mind you) 270,000 BC, no I do not have to do any such thing.  Rubbish.

Also there is a simple notion of simple respect being offered to another person.

Been there, done that.  Iniq appears to me, to be defining respect as hosting a "witness" meeting at some length in her home.  I don't agree with her standard.  Beorning seems to require that no one pick on anyone who might have a rough day or a hard job, ever.  I'm afraid that would only make many of our days much harder and rougher, if not outright destructive.  Can't promise that either.  "Simple" respect used this way, starts to have all those problems of "common" sense.  That, I am willing to grant you! 

Then there is the issue of coming online to brag about the exploits.

I'm a little more open to this one...  Sure, you'd expect less argument in G&C.  Still, I don't think it merits anywhere near the level of outrage and venom I sensed from Iniq.  Reads as complete overkill/ risking hyperbole to me, and possibly showing a desire to have no space for the OP either.  Can't expect much appreciation there.

[kylie]

Also, it's inherently flawed to compare wanting to talk about your faith with complete strangers and wanting to talk to them about common social issues that effect everyone. Faith is, as I stated before, something personal and your faith has no effect on anyone else, which is why you're free to chose and worship as you wish.

I agree with that...  But it's practically the essence of "evangelic faith" to work against it.

     And there we have the crux of the issue, and perhaps so much opposition and ridicule flying both ways.  One side feels a need to play "witness" for something the other may not even care to court at all.

[Kythia]

Huh, had a point to make but can't fulfil the "All points must accompanied by a picture of a kitten cuddling a cupcake" requirement.  Guess I'll keep shtum.

[Oniya]

So, yesterday one of the little Oni's classmates started giving her a hard time because of the purse she bought at the RenFaire.  She picked it out, but it does have a certain alternative religious symbol on it.  Happens to be the religion we practice.  He told her he was going to tell the teacher that she had 'Satanic stuff' in class.

I gave her a couple of rejoinders to use.  I won't share the first one because it's a play on her name, but I told her she could always point out 'I can do magic - didn't you see the talent show?', say that she has a wand and wizard's robes to go with it, or go all StoreHouse Junior on him and start talking about the Order of Pythagoras.  Humorous deflection?  Yup.  And if you can't dazzle 'em with dialog, baffle 'em with bullshit.

When Mr. Oniya was in middle-to-high school, there was a guy who would walk around dipping his fingers in water, spritzing people with it and saying 'Made you a Catholic.'  That stopped when Mr. Oniya retorted with a smile, saying 'Does that mean I can make you a Jew?'  (Which resulted in said spritzer covering his groin and backing off quickly.)  I suspect that this was more a case of the other kid being a bit of an ass, rather than an attempt at conversion, but the humor got the point across that it wasn't welcome.

And in keeping with the theme, A cupcake that is a kitten.

[Bloodied Porcelain]

So, yesterday one of the little Oni's classmates started giving her a hard time because of the purse she bought at the RenFaire.  She picked it out, but it does have a certain alternative religious symbol on it.  Happens to be the religion we practice.  He told her he was going to tell the teacher that she had 'Satanic stuff' in class.

I gave her a couple of rejoinders to use.  I won't share the first one because it's a play on her name, but I told her she could always point out 'I can do magic - didn't you see the talent show?', say that she has a wand and wizard's robes to go with it, or go all StoreHouse Junior on him and start talking about the Order of Pythagoras.  Humorous deflection?  Yup.  And if you can't dazzle 'em with dialog, baffle 'em with bullshit.

When Mr. Oniya was in middle-to-high school, there was a guy who would walk around dipping his fingers in water, spritzing people with it and saying 'Made you a Catholic.'  That stopped when Mr. Oniya retorted with a smile, saying 'Does that mean I can make you a Jew?'  (Which resulted in said spritzer covering his groin and backing off quickly.)  I suspect that this was more a case of the other kid being a bit of an ass, rather than an attempt at conversion, but the humor got the point across that it wasn't welcome.

And in keeping with the theme, A cupcake that is a kitten.

Entirely unrelated to the OP, but the more I hear about Mr. Oniya and Little Oni, the more I become convinced that your family is made of molten awesome.

[Braioch]

My view is pretty much her Avi, a smaller version of her avi with pigtails and now a wand, and the other one of approximate size of her Avi, but with a fantastic mustache and top hat.

[Shjade]

All in all, this thread appears to be a blue ribbon example for the statement, "This is why we can't have nice things."

Starts out as a joke thread - possibly a pretty weak joke thread, up to the reader's sense of humor - and devolves into an overblown debacle not because of religion bashing, but because of pre-emptive defensiveness about religion bashing which then, perhaps ironically, inspires responses that are much closer to religion bashing than the OP, thereby motivating even more defensiveness and we're off to the races.

I can't figure out why either side took it so seriously.

[Braioch]

Shjade, the rules have changed, we can't take you seriously unless you bring a cat picture into the mix.

[Shjade]

That's okay, since my point was for people to not take things seriously. Might as well start with me! =D

[Beguile's Mistress]

[Beorning]

Already posted! :P  ;)

[Pumpkin Seeds]

Sad to say but 17 hours isn’t unusual.  What is unusual and sucks is they still expect me to be there early to be in charge.

As for religion being sacred, I really could care less the berth people give to religion.  I simply believe in mutual respect for things that people hold dear and personal.  Not once have I argued that religion should be treated more sacredly than someone’s view point on gay marriage or abortion.  These are interests, beliefs and ideas held close to people’s hearts.  These notions should be treated with respect when engaging in discussion with people.  If the man is indeed going around talking to people about his religion than he is being brave enough to share with others something he personal and important to himself.  Just as someone going door to door for gay marriage is doing the same.  A simple, “no thank you” is all that would have taken.  Sadly, the OP couldn’t brag about having said “no thank you.”

There is no inherent difference between someone approaching me regarding abortion rights than someone approaching me regarding religion.  They are coming to make some attempt to garner my support for their causes.  I might be opposed to their cause or have no interest in their cause, so in effect the situations become similar.  Making a rude joke or comment to one is the same, regardless of purpose of their approach. 

As for religion bashing evidence, there have been threads created with titles about the intelligence of people of faith and entire discussion revolving around how religion should just be destroyed.  There are entire discussion talking about how religious people are evil, how religion has destroyed such and such and etc.  There is a difference between using critical thinking to debate with a person the merits and flaws of religion and simply resorting to calling them evil and stupid.  I do not see how simply asking for intelligent discussion and respect in regard to religion is asking for religion to be sacred.  Entire threads are shut down for much less insult than is given in some of these religious discussions.  The line is crossed when the ideas and philosophies of religion, when the institution becomes less a target than the people.

[Shjade]

As for religion bashing evidence, there have been threads created with titles about the intelligence of people of faith and entire discussion revolving around how religion should just be destroyed.  There are entire discussion talking about how religious people are evil, how religion has destroyed such and such and etc.

Oh, there's no question people have made some pretty horrible threads that could fairly be described as anti-religion on this forum.

This just isn't one of those threads, despite how some have attempted to portray it as one.

[Kythia]

Oh, there's no question people have made some pretty horrible threads that could fairly be described as anti-religion on this forum.

This just isn't one of those threads, despite how some have attempted to portray it as one.

PumpkinSeeds' point (as I read it at least) is that the atmosphere those threads create - and posts in this one, I return to TaintedandDelish - are, in her opinion, the reason this rather pointless thread was made.  That the OP wanted validation for an action she saw as funny and knew that the culture of PROC would give that validation.  I'm inclined to agree that this thread as a whole hasn't particularly fallen into that category or even the OP's actions taken alone.  But they are - in Pumpkin's opinion if I read her right and in mine certainly - the things that created a tacit atmosphere that made the OP think that a thread devoted to bragging how she had made a joke (and a thread titled "Falls over laughing" which discusses your own joke is clearly nothing but bragging) would get her the validation she wanted.

[Cyrano Johnson]

All in all, this thread appears to be a blue ribbon example for the statement, "This is why we can't have nice things."

So, so right.

Except for kittens with cupcakes. Those are nice things.

[kylie]

Starts out as a joke thread - possibly a pretty weak joke thread, up to the reader's sense of humor - and devolves into an overblown debacle not because of religion bashing, but because of pre-emptive defensiveness about religion bashing which then, perhaps ironically, inspires responses that are much closer to religion bashing than the OP, thereby motivating even more defensiveness and we're off to the races.

I can't figure out why either side took it so seriously.

     What eats me is that Iniq's response read to me as what you might expect of a formal complaint about impropriety.  Enough puffy repetitions of uncivil, intolerant, and rude, etc. -- with enough "oomph" and insistence about simply taking offense -- and I start to wonder when someone is going to go and have a race instead to see who can be first to complain to the admins in PM loudest, or what is possibly going to ratchet things up to the thread being locked before responses come back.  That's a formula that often shuts things down with a chilling effect, and I do take that seriously.

Entire threads are shut down for much less insult than is given in some of these religious discussions.  The line is crossed when the ideas and philosophies of religion, when the institution becomes less a target than the people.

And there it is more directly, even.  Sounds to me like someone thinks the thread should be shut down in order to freeze out all reports of, "Yeah I made a little joke about being approached I think by someone seriously seeking to convert me into something I have no interest in whatsoever, and I found it pretty amusing that the joke actually worked and bought me some space and relief."  Heaven forbid anyone let off some steam when they're approached in ways they don't care for -- and ways many others also don't care for.  Particularly if the evangelist actually backed off and didn't go on with their very serious work of pressing the conversation!  Oh horrors. 

     I can understand Pumpkin thinks that religion is of such importance that people should tread as carefully around it as say gun control or gay rights or war and peace or the environment or road maintenance, what have you.  After all, many people have made up their mind that their religion is going to provide some meaning for a lot of parts of life, so in a circular way it has to be important (arguably more important, or it wouldn't be able to cover everything very well, but anyway).  I just can't agree because here in particular, treating religion "equally" means acknowledging that what is important to some people, is continually placing demands on others to accept something that cannot be verified and may already be diametrically opposed to their beliefs -- while at the same time to me it obviously isn't as important as other said issues which can be observed and dealt with. 

      Moreover in the case of other said issues you are more likely to be engaged in some hearing on what are we all going to do about it (or not) or why are we even having this talk right now, aside from the other's wish to drag me into this or that group and place any number of other unspecified demands on me.  The format of the approach is all about demanding boundless, unconditional recognition and the demand for no jokes is part of that.  It's not a demand I would even consider reasonable about things that are important to me -- that sort of complaint, I would only get into if the joke is aimed at merits of some specific, tangible issue. 

      Now if Pumpkin didn't consider war and peace for Syria, say, to be handled reasonably as an issue and project by someone who came along demanding she join a certain protest, I may think she's laughing at a messy or erroneous handling of a real, identifiable issue and agree it was all pretty silly.  But if she goes demanding I treat "evangelic people" as serious business just because quite a few people say it's important to them, well why not the Organization for the Liberation of Sentient Holy Lawn Gnomes, too?  (What if they have declared there is no God but the lawn gnome, and evangelizing to them is a mortal threat according to the specifics of their religion?  Will Pumpkin then apologize and promise that they will never be approached again?  That would mean taking away something important from the Seriousness of people who believe it's their duty to evangelize.)  And then there's everyone else who wants to sit next to you on the bus constantly discussing, or to debate or shelter in your house tonight and over the next three years.
 

[Shjade]

PumpkinSeeds' point (as I read it at least) is that the atmosphere those threads create - and posts in this one, I return to TaintedandDelish - are, in her opinion, the reason this rather pointless thread was made.

See, the thing about that that strikes me as funny? TaintedandDelish's first post in the thread was just "Good one, TSM :)" That's it.

The posts you linked where T&D gets more "bashy?" Those happened after Pumpkin started posting about the thread's content being so negative and comparing it to mocking promoters of gay rights. This is what I meant about preemptive defensiveness; the upset about the atmosphere such threads create was being brought up before the atmosphere was even there, perhaps even causing it to appear by bringing those kinds of responses out of the woodwork to provoke the people who were acting touchy before anything really worth getting touchy about had even been brought up in the thread.

In other words, at the very least, Pumpkin and Iniq hijacked the thread to talk about E's forum community stance toward religion; at worst, they encouraged the very behavior they were complaining about in the process.

On the other bit though, yeah, the thread was pointless in the first place.

[Pumpkin Seeds]

So my stating my opinion on the matter is excuse for someone to begin religion bashing.  Good to know.  This is pretty much amounting to, "keep your mouth shut and we'll be nice."

[Oniya]

     What eats me is that Iniq's response read to me as what you might expect of a formal complaint about impropriety.  Enough puffy repetitions of uncivil, intolerant, and rude, etc. -- with enough "oomph" and insistence about simply taking offense -- and I start to wonder when someone is going to go and have a race instead to see who can be first to complain to the admins in PM loudest, or what is possibly going to ratchet things up to the thread being locked before responses come back.  That's a formula that often shuts things down with a chilling effect, and I do take that seriously.

Of course, there's always the option for people to take it upon themselves to take a step back and remember to be civil to one another before staff intervenes.

[Shjade]

You're right, Pumpkin, that's exactly what I said.  ::)

It's more like, "if you shout 'fire,' expect people to show up with hoses."

[kylie]

Of course, there's always the option for people to take it upon themselves to take a step back and remember to be civil to one another before staff intervenes.

Not sure where you're going with this exactly.  If Iniq says the OP is already uncivil because it brought up the joke and the amusement at it... 

And if Pumpkin says well this belonged in G&C... 

But come to think of it, I wonder if this wouldn't have been pushed back here if it were originally in G&C just because it mentions religion and religion does often get at least that much preemptive caution (it's in the section title after all, P&R, already putatively treating it as "on par" with so many social issues that are about more specific, tangible, and quantifiable matters)...

     We run into an impasse given that we seem to disagree about what civility would require (I don't think it should require "witness" in my house or just maybe saying 'thank you for speaking to me' etc. for something I don't really hold interest in, but maybe Iniq does, on and on with various other possible formulae). 

     And staff going and trying to act on that, can be nothing particularly moral or settling the matter any better, but simply a matter of who used enough language like "uncivil," how forcefully, that they decided to favor one position and not another -- or just that they couldn't stand having people argue any more (at the moment that is -- these things tend to come back later).  It does happen, imo.

[Iniquitous]

After time away to deal with familial issues…

1. I am in the US
2. I am not christian
3. I am not conservative

With that said.

I found the OP to be rude and immature.
I found the OP coming on here to brag about what she did to be extremely childish.

It is the second of those that bugs me the most because it shows that she knew she’d get, as someone else pointed out, validation for her actions.

Moving on.

I have no issue with humor - but I do not find humor at the expense of someone else to be funny. And in my opinion, using someone’s sincere belief to make a joke just because you don’t have the gonads/are in a bad mood/hate religion/whatever is incredibly rude.

I do not expect everyone else to follow the standards that I live by. But I cannot stand the mocking of other people’s beliefs. Trust and believe I get enough of it since I live in the bible belt and am not christian.

And with that said…

If it was not noticed, and I do not see how it wasn’t, I did step away of my own choice. Mainly because I grow sick and tired of trying to explain why I found this whole situation to be offensive. Just as I find it mildly offensive to have you implying that I’d be running to the admin.

[kylie]

    Saw a zillion cupcakes that were kitties earlier.  Finally satisfies own pickiness about the "hugging" part:



I rather like the feisty, rather demonic looking kitty too.  Please no protest about someone's solemn beliefs being violated, when it shows up in a very silly roleplay.  We might even tackle global warming and thus do something useful there -- you know, those demons can be really, really sexy hot...  Would never happen on E right...  I mean, who knows who might be offended.  >:)

[kylie]

     Trying to rephrase something simply:  You don't have to identify as Christian, conservative, or be in the US.  I don't care.  Guessing what you say you are, is not the point at all.  (If I came across as if it was, then I was wasting time.  Fine.)  You can still be making a kind of argument or claim that many people who do happen to identify as those things, share. 

And following that line can still lead toward censorship and persecution.  Iran is just one infamous case of  a similar prohibitive logic getting a great deal of (imo, way too much) influence.

[lilhobbit37]

Just a note, all humor is at the expense of someone.

The chicken may not like everyone questioning his motives for crossing the road.

Absurd? Yes, but the point is simply, every joke is about someone or something. It will be offensive to someone or something if someone tries to find the offensive part.

Thus why comedians make fun of themselves first. Because if you can laugh at yourself, everything else you say MUST be ok.

And yes, there are LOTS of people who laugh about lgbt issues. I'm lesbian, and I'll laugh at a decent joke about gay marriage. Why? Because the whole point of humor is that someone IS the butt of the joke.

In this case? The mormon was NOT directly harmed. The joke wasn't ABOUT him, it was simply directed at him. It was a simply haha about well just because you think A is real, doesn't mean I don't think B is real.

She could have said many much worse jokes that would have questioned his faith, beliefs, or personal character. She did none of those things. She made a silly joke about unicorns.

This joke did not harm anyone in anyway (except those hardcore people who really hate unicorns apparently) and did what it was intended to.

Whether or not you like that she posted here, the fact is she did NOT bash religion in anyway. In fact, she simply used a joke to emphasize that not all people believe in what that person did. No harm, no foul. If it made her laugh, great, but if she hadn't laughed, would it be creating such drama?

If she had said instead that she pointed out to him that she might believe in unicorns, and were they in heaven too, but then went about her day WITHOUT laughing, then it would be ok? Because she wasn't "making the joke on him" but was asking a serious question?

Everyone is jumping onto the fact that there were 2 people in her group and 1 in his, therefore she MUST have been attacking him because of superiority in numbers. But the fact is she very well might have said the same thing alone, simply to get him not to say his speech. That her friend was there could very well just happen to be part of the story. Many posters here have said as much. That they SOLO would have said something similar or along the same tone. So the fact 2 people were involved is hardly reason to turn a joke into an attack.

[Oniya]

At this point, I'm not talking about the OP's actions towards the Mormon.  Or anyone's actions towards a door-to-door witnesser.  It's been pointed out  that the same positions on both sides have been repeated numerous times, with neither side gaining any ground.  In chess, that's called a stalemate.  It means no one is going to 'win', no matter how long it is drawn out, even with the attempts that have been actively made to change directions. 

People disagree on this.  Sitting here trying to get the 'last word in' on the subject isn't going to change that.  Sniping at other forum members is definitely not going to change that.  If you can debate a topic without resorting to that, more power to you.  That's what this area is for.  If it comes down to pointing a finger and saying 'That person started it' - which I have personally seen in this thread in the past few pages - then it is no longer debate. 

[Kythia]

You're right, Pumpkin, that's exactly what I said.  ::)

It's more like, "if you shout 'fire,' expect people to show up with hoses."

It wasn't hoses though, it was matchsticks and kerosene. ;D

Edit:  Huh, what do you know.  Failed to successfully use copy and paste.  Apparently not capable of operating notepad successfully until I've had my morning...well, lets not go in to what my morning wake up consists of.

Anyway.  The point I meant to make was simply to agree, as I said before, that this particular thread hasn't been a particularly heinous example if its been an example at all.  I'm talking more about the culture of PROC in general rather than this specific thread.

[kylie]

     If it had gone into G&C instead, would it really have stayed there?  I'm curious because it seems to me that things involving anything to do with religion tend to get pushed over here (or at least they used to).  And once they're here, anyone can say "Look, we're supposed to be critical here and I can't stand anyone making any light of this situation whatsoever."  It's not what I would call critical thinking so much as moralizing, but if someone is going to say civil society means monkish seriousness about everything, well it's another shade of criticism. 

     In that case, where could people expect to vent and laugh a little when it comes to religion?  I'm just wondering if we don't already have a shade of demand for self-censorship already built in, the way this thing has flowed.   

[Pumpkin Seeds]

It could easily have stayed in G&C.  I have seen threads involving complaints about religion posted up in Bad and Ugly and similarly seen humor presented over at G&C. 

[Braioch]

At this point, I'm not talking about the OP's actions towards the Mormon.  Or anyone's actions towards a door-to-door witnesser.  It's been pointed out  that the same positions on both sides have been repeated numerous times, with neither side gaining any ground.  In chess, that's called a stalemate.  It means no one is going to 'win', no matter how long it is drawn out, even with the attempts that have been actively made to change directions. 

People disagree on this.  Sitting here trying to get the 'last word in' on the subject isn't going to change that.  Sniping at other forum members is definitely not going to change that.  If you can debate a topic without resorting to that, more power to you.  That's what this area is for.  If it comes down to pointing a finger and saying 'That person started it' - which I have personally seen in this thread in the past few pages - then it is no longer debate.

This.

This is why I wash my hands of this thread and am thoroughly finished with these circular arguments and the shenanigans. Fare thee well ladies and gents, I shall return to my world of sexy men, humor and tiny adorable animals.

No seriously, have you watched videos of baby hippos? Makes everything else seem inconsequential.

[Cyrano Johnson]

No seriously, have you watched videos of baby hippos? Makes everything else seem inconsequential.

I was this close to diverting it into a LOLcats thread. Fuckin' shame.

[Imogen]

I was this close to diverting it into a LOLcats thread. Fuckin' shame.

Lolcats and baby hippos should be able to co-exist in this thread!

[Cyrano Johnson]

And yes, there are LOTS of people who laugh about lgbt issues. I'm lesbian, and I'll laugh at a decent joke about gay marriage. Why? Because the whole point of humor is that someone IS the butt of the joke.

See if I can get this one in before we finally lock the thread:

"What does a lesbian bring on a second date?"

[wait for it]

"A U-Haul."

[BAH-dump-CHING!]

(An oldie but a goodie. Learned that one from the same lesbian friend who gave me the first Ani DiFranco mixtape I ever heard.)

[Cyrano Johnson]

Lolcats and baby hippos should be able to co-exist in this thread!

It's true! But what can you do, some kittens really get mean.

[Kythia]

See if I can get this one in before we finally lock the thread:

"What does a lesbian bring on a second date?"

[wait for it]

"A U-Haul."

[BAH-dump-CHING!]

(An oldie but a goodie. Learned that one from the same lesbian friend who gave me the first Ani DiFranco mixtape I ever heard.)

I don't get it?

Two dogs sat in a park.  First one says "Hey, did you see the football over the weekend?"  Second says "Fuck me!  A talking dog!"

[Cyrano Johnson]

... the U-Haul is cuz they're moving in together, see.

(Love that talking dog one.)

[Kythia]

Huh, looks like there's a cultural stereotype of lesbians I've missed there.  Didn't know that was a thing. 

[Cyrano Johnson]

Huh, looks like there's a cultural stereotype of lesbians I've missed there.  Didn't know that was a thing.

It was a bit of an in-joke. I myself probably would never have encountered it had I not successfully approached the Lesbian Tribe and gotten one of them to approach and groom me*.

* Little Jane Goodall humour there, which admittedly might be pushing the envelope.

[Kythia]

I tried, I really did.  I covered myself in their urine so I'd smell like one of them and they'd accept me.  For some reason though ambushing someone, forcing them to piss in a bucket, pouring said bucket over myself then attempting to talk to her friends didn't seem to ingratiate me.  *shrug* 

[Cyrano Johnson]

I tried, I really did.  I covered myself in their urine so I'd smell like one of them and they'd accept me.  For some reason though ambushing someone, forcing them to piss in a bucket, pouring said bucket over myself then attempting to talk to her friends didn't seem to ingratiate me.  *shrug*

Some people are so picky, honestly. I'll never understand it.

[Thesunmaid]

Well for anyone who gets mad at me for saying this..I have no problems with people having religion in their lives. I am happy for people who are satisfied with their worship. Good for them that they have found something in their life to believe in. But most of the time the ones who come up to me asking if I found Jesus tend to get obnoxious and self righteous when you tell them politely no thank you. I have seen this guy around at the parks where they hold their listen to us preach and we will tell you your going to hell meetings they hold monthly in the middle of a very public town square.Its a very publicly obnoxious church in the area.

I did not make fun of his religion...I did not mock him in anyway..and to me..finding out that unicorns are real would be darn good news. But seriously...religion is like a penis..its all well and good to have one...but you really should not wave it about in public and don't try and shove it down my throat.

Also as for the whole knowing what he would say..the white shirt..black pants book of Mormon in his hand and little name tag that said elder so and so..tipped me off to the fact he wanted to tell me he loves him some Jesus. I am an atheist...I don't get pissed off at my friends that are religious and I have actually in the past had one ask if it was all right for them to pray over their meal because they did not want to offend me. I have also talked with a lot of people about different religions because not that i believe but i do from a historical stand point find it interesting. As well as finding out what the religion means to them is also interesting.These types are fine with me...its the ones who seem to want to insinuate that I eat babies and roast puppies over an open fire because I choose to believe in Darwin over Jesus. I didn't say anything nasty...I didn't say anything to put him down..and he looked bewildered but he was not insulted...so..I am doing better than some other times.I get that the ones I get annoyed with are a very small minority.

I have also had one say "Have you accepted Jesus as your personal savior? and when I replied "no thank you."they followed me trying to shove pamphlets in my hand and I spun around and smiled saying"No I have not accepted him as my personal savior...but if you would like to let Mr Christ know we are still taking resumes and will be conducting interviews early next week."

I don't choose to get vulgar or angry..I simply say things to throw them off and they tend to stand there looking confused and then I smile...tell them to have a nice day and walk away. Some of them are out to save my soul whether I like it or not...so throwing them off by saying something odd I think is better than telling them where to stick their bible.

Have I mentioned my best friend in high school was a devout catholic and the people I game with are Christians? I do have religious friends...I do not mock their choices and they accept mine...I don't mind God in any of his incarnations...its his fan boys and girls I can't stand.



Kylie

Heheh I saved that picture of the demon kitten and the cupcake...that is just too dam cute.And also bring on the LOL cats and babie hippos!

[gaggedLouise]

... the U-Haul is cuz they're moving in together, see.

(Love that talking dog one.)

I once googled "Dykes in Dallas" (somehow inspired by both the tv series and the pseudo junk title Debbie does Dallas) and got two hits, one of them an ad for a firm doing sewers and dikes in Texas, the other one a gossip notice about a reporter who, in her student days,  "used to hang out with a gang of leather dykes in Dallas".

A lesbian friend commented: "apparently lesbianism is well entrenched in Texas".  ;D