Anon wrote: ↑
March 31st, 2024, 17:09
I mean if you don't want to take shit from people it's obviously more than your right to do so.
I'd only suggest to not use arguments that might also attack other people indirectly, eg, attacking christianism.
But of course you do whatever you want
Your suggestion is most welcome.
Don't take it as me trying to fight you or insult you, but here is how I see it:
Making arguments that might attack other people indirectly is wrong way to do things.
And I do agree with that.
I did follow that principle before.
Overtime I realized this principle applies only to religion, Christianity specifically, but doesn't apply to other topics.
It's impossible/difficult to criticize religion without indirectly attacking someone, just as it's impossible/difficult to do the same with homosexuality.
Following this line of thinking, I'm more than justified in my methods.
Stating homosexuality is a mental illness, should not be tolerated in any shape or form, and people should be shunned out for it is an indirect attack on me.
Since I can take what I dish out, I see no problem in doing so.
Also, there's a thing using the most vile language that overshadows the point some people try to directly or indirectly say I'm abnormal, a disorder, an anomaly, a mental illness, a molested child, an so on and so forth.
When I do the same, it's "
attack on christianity".
I find it spineless at best and hypocritical at worst; something I cannot respect.