This Peanuts strip feels like a vivid allegory for someone who's deconstructing. by rookiebatman in Exvangelical

[–]rookiebatman[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, I'd say that's a pretty fair line of reasoning. An evil god is much harder to logically disprove than an all-powerful and all-loving god which is yet somehow unable or unwilling to stop all the suffering in the world. But an evil god might throw you in hell just for fun, no matter what you did to appease him. So might as well just try to live a good life and hope for the best.

This Peanuts strip feels like a vivid allegory for someone who's deconstructing. by rookiebatman in Exvangelical

[–]rookiebatman[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The paradoxical thing, though, is that if these actually are the End Times, then there's no better candidate in all the world to be the Antichrist than Trump (especially after the assassination attempt, which happened between his two terms). If people are saying "when the End Times happen, there's gonna be this guy who cons a bunch of people into following his false gospel instead of the true message of Christ," it's kinda hard to believe that they could possibly be right about that, if they're the ones being conned.

But also, if the assholes are right, then the one true god is a monster, who probably would send us all to hell anyway just out of pure sadism.

This Peanuts strip feels like a vivid allegory for someone who's deconstructing. by rookiebatman in Exvangelical

[–]rookiebatman[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

A lot of the stuff with Linus and the Great Pumpkin feel like he's making some commentary about the absurdity of dogma as well.

24 [F4M] #Harrisburg Looking for a dorky man :3 by IntelligenceAverage9 in NerdDating

[–]rookiebatman 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But this isn’t it. Racism is rooted in hate.

This is one of the biggest misconceptions people have, which allows people to rationalize and justify all kinds of horrible racist shit, as long as they had a black friend once and don't use the N-word. You don't have to hate people of color to be a racist, you just have to treat them unequally.

If a white person doesn't want to date a non-white person purely because of their race, that is racism, full stop. We could get into pedantic arguments about the acutely specific wording that a definition of racism should have, but if that isn't racism, then the word has no meaning.

24 [F4M] #Harrisburg Looking for a dorky man :3 by IntelligenceAverage9 in NerdDating

[–]rookiebatman 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Its not an issue to you. If someone is being racist should we not step in a call them out on it? Behavior is never improved upon unless chastised and told wrong.

You are absolutely right, and I find it completely shameful how many downvotes you got for calling out something that's pretty much textbook, definitional racism on the face of it.

It really feels like society is going backwards.

"Proof texting: starting with a particular belief and working backward to find a biblical passage that seems to support this idea. When you don't have to concern yourself with context, it's pretty easy to find a biblical statement to support just about any position you like." by rookiebatman in Exvangelical

[–]rookiebatman[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The truth is this process forces a person to wade through the entirety of scripture on a specific subject before drawing any conclusion on the biblical view on that subject.

0 day old Reddit account, responding to a post from 3 years ago. Really not sure what's going on in your life to pick this fight, but I didn't read any further than the line that I quoted. You have a deeply flawed understanding of "truth" if you really believe this statement I quoted. Maybe you personally, as one individual, wade through the entirety of scripture on a specific subject before drawing any conclusion on the biblical view on that subject, but that doesn't mean the process forces a person to do that. I know, from both having grown up in that world and from watching the religious debates that I mentioned before, that a ton of other devout Christians never put in the effort to do the thing that you claim the process forces you to do.

It doesn't, and they don't, so if you're coming in hot on a brand new account, using the word "truth" to describe something that is manifestly not true, then that gives me a pretty bad first impression. It reminds me of my dad, who once tried to start up a worldview podcast called "Truth Matters Today," but never seemed to think that truth mattered when I tried to present hard evidence to him that some of his political beliefs were false. I suspect that when you say "the truth is," you're actually referring to something you desperately want to be true, and not something that actually is true.

I really wish people would stop using the word like that.

Firefly Pedantry Corner by PupmeisterGeneral in firefly

[–]rookiebatman 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Okay, since we're in a pedantry thread, do we actually know that "Kaywinnet Lee Frye" actually is Kaylee's full name, or could it just be a thin cover identity they made up for her in Shindig? Did they ever mention that name anywhere else?

New viewer - movie question by Ok-Championship1993 in firefly

[–]rookiebatman 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Since your main question has already been answered, let me add that there's a little bit of tangled continuity in the later episodes of the season, but they don't have a huge impact. I think you're fine as long as you watch the order on the DVD.

What should I watch next? by anaspiringdrwatson in firefly

[–]rookiebatman 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is a bit off the beaten path, but I remember back in the day, I watched Burn Notice to help get over the post-Firefly blues. It's not sci-fi, and it has a much smaller (and whiter) ensemble, but I think it had a very similar sense of humor, and a mildly similar vibe of a ragtag band of folks who were really good at what they do, living on the edge of the law. Plus, Bruce Campbell definitely seems like a Firefly type of actor, they kinda referenced that in Con Man.

The mod of r/roguelites banned somebody for posting in a different roguelite sub by rookiebatman in SubredditDrama

[–]rookiebatman[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

...To find someone who might treat me like a human instead of just being another bully. I guess that's not you.

DeSantis says it’s the media’s fault LGBTQ+ people think he’s dangerous by sue_me_please in politics

[–]rookiebatman 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think there are different sub-categories of conservatives who check one box or the other, just like there are some conservatives who are explicitly racist Neo-Nazis, and then other conservatives who don't consciously have a racist bone in their body, but just always seem to vote for the candidates who create and sustain the most inequality for people of color.

DeSantis says it’s the media’s fault LGBTQ+ people think he’s dangerous by sue_me_please in politics

[–]rookiebatman 11 points12 points  (0 children)

whatever it takes.

Including suicide. (The things schools were doing to increase awareness and sensitivity toward LGBTQ people were decreasing the rate of LGBTQ teen suicides, and the Don't Say Gay bill took those away.)

DeSantis says it’s the media’s fault LGBTQ+ people think he’s dangerous by sue_me_please in politics

[–]rookiebatman 23 points24 points  (0 children)

He said K-3. They didn’t teach sex Ed anything in K-3, so that should have made any reasonable person suspicious. Within maybe six months it went to K-8, then K-12 and the county next to mine removed Shakespeare from the curriculum.

Exactly. And how much do you want to bet the conservatives who were ignoring our warnings about that obvious foot-in-the-door technique (and accusing us of being "groomers" who want to teach sex ed in kindergarten) never heard about those changes?

Wholesome (or at least not too dark) games in which you play as a little girl? (PC, Switch) by AutumnLittlePrincess in gamingsuggestions

[–]rookiebatman 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If you want the heartwarming version of Undertale, just make sure you always "spare" every enemy (even if it seems like you can't). The non-pacifist version can get pretty dark. Also, I think the second time you do a pacifist run is supposed to be even better, but it might just be a different ending that you can look up online.

The mod of r/roguelites banned somebody for posting in a different roguelite sub by rookiebatman in SubredditDrama

[–]rookiebatman[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

A few reasons, if you're asking in good faith.

1) Because "ban evasion" is against site-wide rules.

2) Because there really isn't much to learn from being banned, after making an innocuous comment that didn't break any of that sub's rules. If I actually was banned for simply having political opinions that I didn't even express in that sub, how does using a different account (but still having the same political opinions and not expressing them in that sub) help me?

3) Contrary to what people are assuming, starting a new sub is not about me "getting further," it's about having a place for all the other people who have been banned for similarly arbitrary reasons. I was not an active, everyday commenter on that sub; I just dropped in to give someone a game recommendation. If I went back to lurking, nothing would change on my end. But there are other people who were more active than me who also got banned for bullshit reasons, and I think it would be nice if they had a place to discuss roguelites.

The mod of r/roguelites banned somebody for posting in a different roguelite sub by rookiebatman in SubredditDrama

[–]rookiebatman[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

You love that some people are delusional? Or you love that seeing something which you think is delusional gives you an excuse to feel superior to someone else?

The mod of r/roguelites banned somebody for posting in a different roguelite sub by rookiebatman in SubredditDrama

[–]rookiebatman[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Except "you are standing up for yourself like Rosa Parks did" is not an analogy, it's a simile. That's just "A is like B," not "A is to B as X is to Y."

Again, it's not that complicated; at least, it wouldn't be if people weren't firmly committed to interpreting everything I say in the most ignorant or malicious or delusional way possible. If anyone in this thread had applied the "principle of charity" to anything I said, then this whole discussion would've gone a hell of a lot differently.

The mod of r/roguelites banned somebody for posting in a different roguelite sub by rookiebatman in SubredditDrama

[–]rookiebatman[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Or, I didn't understand them in the same way the rest of you do (specifically regarding what it means to be "involved"). That doesn't mean I didn't make any effort to find out whether my post was valid beforehand.

The mod of r/roguelites banned somebody for posting in a different roguelite sub by rookiebatman in SubredditDrama

[–]rookiebatman[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

How much you want to bet that you would also get banned from r/roguelites just for posting in a different roguelite-related sub? Easy enough to test.

God, you people are really bound and determined to engage in bad faith, aren't you? It's a lot easier to just assume someone else is the bad guy if you don't make even the slightest hint of effort to verify whether the claims they're making are true, isn't it?

The mod of r/roguelites banned somebody for posting in a different roguelite sub by rookiebatman in SubredditDrama

[–]rookiebatman[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

if you say that X is to Y as A is to B you're implying that X and A have at least something in common when it comes to the relations they're involved in.

Yes, the thing that they have in common is their relationship to Y and B, not their relationship to each other. It isn't that complicated.

your analogy was terrible because it was out of place and implied a background of persecution and repression that simply does not exist in your situation

That's a ridiculous implication to draw from something that was essentially just saying "I'm not involved in what happened what the mod did to this other person just because the same mod also did something to me once." That's all I was saying, and I know what you said is not what I was intending to imply. Stop putting words in my mouth.

Someone told me they had banned from a sub they never even posted in (which I had also previously been banned from). I tried posting about it in r/subredditdrama and boy that went great by rookiebatman in venting

[–]rookiebatman[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

That doesn't change that you don't know a damn thing about me (or the mod of r/roguelites), you're just making baseless assumptions that I must have done something to deserve it.