"They're one of the most liberal sects of American Christianity apart from Unitarians." On manners of sex and immodest dress? Ummmm, no. And it really wasn't meant as a slam, just a reference to the more modest pearl-clutching that occurs with the more conservative clans out there. They're totally allowed that viewpoint, to be clear.
Perhaps there were references that could have been more on the mark, but the Quakers were rather notorious for their prudish commitment to sexual conservatism, so it couldn't have been THAT far off the mark.... I mean, a good portion of the reason for the famous Quaker dress code was a rejection of immodesty, which seems fairly in line w/the point of the opposition to this film, rightly or wrongly... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plain_dress Though I think I agree that "Puritan" would have been the better reference.
All: upon reflection, the reference to Quakers in the original post was imperfect in the extreme. I have since edited the post to refer to Puritans instead, since that's a better fit.
I didn't want that edit to go without noting the acknowledgement here. And thanks, as always, to the community for the feedback :)
Let's play a game. Let's say I would promise to authorize Mike (no idea if he would do so) to release any information that would prove whether or not I ever, literally ever, posted under the name Gary, or any other account name. What would you be willing to put up for your side of this bargain? Because I'd seriously have zero problem doing this for reasons that should be obvious. So your bluff is called. Let's play.
This is a good question to ponder with a terrible answer....which is a Great Firewall of America....
"I believe the Gestapo will find that the people of Chicago are better armed than those of Portland and will to USE those arms. They will also find them to be much more surly than the inhabitants of Portland. They had best wear bullet proof clothing ... but even that might not protect them." THIS
Welcome to Chicago, federal boyos. It's going to be a bumpy ride....
"The reason that humans ARE humans comes down to one thing - ladies choice about sexual partners. Animals, as opposed to humans, simply go into heat and mate with any passer by." While you're obviously a crazy person on a grand scale, I just wanted to point out that this is not how the animal kingdom works wholesale, so you're also an idiot on matters of biology as well....
If these clowns had only decided to make their position:
"We believe that the negative consequences of speech others don't like should be conversational speech in return, rather than more dire consequences to employment, etc."
Then maybe I could have gotten on board. After all, the counterspeech Mike points out isn't "wrong", but it could be argued to be suboptimal. A call for conversation wouldn't have been received as harshly as a call for a lack of any consequences...because that call is stupid.
Hi there, stupid. Quick question: did you know there are more than one "Tim"s in the world? For instance, there is a Tim Cushing and a Timothy Geigner and we're....wait for it....DIFFERENT PEOPLE. The burn it down post was written by other Tim. To be fair, he's a better writer than I am and that piece, even if I didn't agree with every shred of it, was glorious. So instead of making an ass of yourself here, why don't you go outside and play hide and go fuck yourself?
I for one somehow appreciate the sponsorships at the end of these parody rants. They make me smile for some reason.
You must also not live in Japan, South Korea, or any part of Central or South America....
"A status-quo Democratic administration will only usher in the next Mussolini wannabe, maybe even give Trump a chance for a comeback." This might win the award for one of the stupidest things I've ever seen written on the internet....
There's no place like 127.0.0.1
I sincerely cannot wait to work this dialogue into a different short story that I write....
Noice
Great, now we're making shirts that I have no choice but to buy....