re: #1005 Salamantis

We’re certainly free to citicize religious tenets that we find to be morally abhorrent. Including, but not restricted to, morally abhorrent Islamist religious tenets.

It’s an all or nothing proposition; either you cannot criticize the tenets ofANY religion, or you are free to criticize them ALL.

There you go letting this turn into a debate about free speech. In case you didn’t notice, this is not a forum of free speech. We’re not allowed to say whatever we want to say here. Charles controls that, and he often deletes things that he does not agree with or that he finds offensive. We’re all free to criticize race and sexuality as well. But I’m sure that won’t fly here. And the discussion is over what will be allowed here. The conclusion seems to be that Charles will not allow hateful things to be said about race, gender, sexuality, etc., but religion is fair game.

re: #1006 Salamantis

People who change genders feel naturally inclined to do so; otherwise they wouldn’t go to the trouble of doing it, and suffering the social disadvantages of doing so.

Well there are social disadvantages to being a porn star, so are we to believe that people are naturally inclined to pursue that career? In that case, I guess we wouldn’t be fair to criticize them, would we? People feel natural inclinations to murder. Are they off limits as well? Because that would be hate speech, right?

Oh…and the biggie…it’s also suggested that people are naturally inclined to believe in a higher power (a.k.a. to be religious). Uh oh…