D&D General The Satanic Panic never really died?

[Celebrim]

It’s possible his comment falls under constructive ridicule that Umbran said is okay.

“Ridicule, like any tool, can be used constructively or destructively.”

Under that heading, it should be noted that participation in this thread is a class three misdemeanor in the state of Connecticut that could result in a $50 fine.

 

[Celebrim]

As a good soldier of ignorance and closedmindedness her mum needs to do her goshdarndest to fight against their greatest enemies -> imagination, creativity, rational and free thought.

Ahem. Sixth person.

 

[billd91]

References to hijab and cheeseburgers?

Not really. A belief is a belief is a belief. And, for what it's worth, I think they're all empty and irrational.

I just don't make arbitrary distinctions between them.

A belief may be a belief (and/or a cultural marker but that's a question for another time), but they're generally about practices you do or can do, but mustn't. And we all know that none of the magic or anything else in D&D is actually something you do or can do. That's where the "a belief is a belief" breaks down.

 

[Celebrim]

No, it wasn’t acceptable. I’m out for the evening at a pub quiz (it’s half time, I’m allowed my phone briefly) but I’ll get to it.

Take your time. Enjoy your ale. I'm more interested in how much of a leash I have discuss religion.

 

[Xenonnonex]

Ahem. Sixth person.

I never said anything about religion.

 

[generic]

Under that heading, it should be noted that participation in this thread is a class three misdemeanor in the state of Connecticut that could result in a $50 fine.

Ah... fortunately for me, I do not dwell in the great state of Connecticut.

Excellent point, but, ultimately useless and meaningless.

 

[Celebrim]

I'm not quite sure what your analogies were for anyway.

A true statement, and the sort of confession of ignorance that never does anyone any harm.

My point is that some people in this thread accuse us, who think the Satanic Panic is ridiculous, of being intolerant.

I think the Satanic Panic is ridiculous, but neither me nor anyone else I am aware of is really concerned with whether you are being intolerant.

My point is that there is a limit to tolerance.

Usually people discover their limit to tolerance just right around when it would actually be needed.

I can tolerate not eating pork products because of your religious belief. I can not tolerate trying to deprive others (of your religion or not) of a product because 'it contains pork' when there is evidence that it does not contain pork. You can't defend that kind of thing by raising the shield of 'Freedom of Religion'.

First of all, the OP is a mother speaking to her daughter out of sincere concern. The mom isn't threatening the existence of the game or the pork pies in your pub or whatever. Nor is she trying to shield her beliefs behind "freedom of religion". Beyond that, I'd only say that my guess from the way you talk and think is that you aren't pious and don't know a lot of people who are, so these waters are waters you are not intimately familiar with. I could be wrong about that, but it's just the impression I get.

 

[Raunalyn]

None of my analogies were as obvious of a point as eating bacon. Remember, one of the examples was getting photographed with a pig - not touching, not eating, etc.

However, before I start launching into a full blown discussion of sacred texts and what sincere religious people are thinking, I'm going to have to get that cleared with higher authority.

I understand your concern regarding mocking someone for their religious belief, if I am interpreting your comment correctly (and please correct me if I am not).

However, I don't see how the OP was mocking religious belief; I do see him questioning the ignorance of the person's mother, though. There is a difference here.

 

[generic]

First of all, the OP is a mother speaking to her daughter out of sincere concern. The mom isn't threatening the existence of the game or the pork pies in your pub or whatever. Nor is she trying to shield her beliefs behind "freedom of religion". Beyond that, I'd only say that my guess from the way you talk and think is that you aren't pious and don't know a lot of people who are, so these waters are waters you are intimately familiar with. I could be wrong about that, but it's just the impression I get.

This intrigues me... What is your point? I do understand that you've been reprimanded for speaking on these subjects in the past, but I do want to hear what you're going to say.

Let's all just slow down for a moment, and let our tempers subside.

If certain posters (ahem) seem opaque, it might be for a reason.

 

[Celebrim]

Ah... fortunately for me, I do not dwell in the great state of Connecticut.

Excellent point, but, ultimately useless and meaningless.

The nerd in me is always making references to obscure bits of lore and pop culture. It's like quoting Star Wars or Monty Python. If you haven't seen the film, probably means nothing to you.