God Hears Your Prayers

You know, this always tends to happen after a while here. Someone posts something that has to do with faith and then people start crying about why this is inappropriate here despite the various other submissions that tend to offend many others in equal ways.

I'm going to say what's been said before on this site many times ad nauseum:

"If you don't like it, don't view it!"

There. Plain and simple.

I'm a Christian and I don't agree with some of the nude or any of the satanic submissions. Not all nudes are tasteless (look at works from Michelangelo, Boticelli, etc.) and a select few submissions have been tasteful, but there are others that just scream "trash" IMO. Do I go screaming to the admins about how offensive this is (especially when kids visit this site)? No. I just ignore it and move on to the next submission that interests me. I've even appreciated the good artwork of those of other faiths because the art was good despite where I stand in my beliefs.

And don't vote it down because you don't agree with the message. This is Gnome-Look/KDE-Look/<your-favorite-DE>-Look, not digg.com. It's about the artwork and the quality of it. Stick to that and respect the beliefs and standpoints of everyone else for goodness sakes!

Sheesh! Get a grip, folks!

Re: Oh noes, not aga

by falco101 on: May 5 2007

Score 50%

inactive user

Thanks, finally another voice of reason. I knew I would get bashed for this, I was expecting it, but 60 someodd comments...

Re: Re: Oh noes, not

by animacide on: May 5 2007

Score 50%

If you expected your opinion would be attacked that just proves that you are being intentionally confrontational just so you can preach. How childish is that? And you act like I'm the bad guy when I say that I for one don't want it! Again, if you don't want your opinion challenged don't post it.

Re: Oh noes, not aga

by animacide on: May 5 2007

Score 50%

We have just as much right to say we dislike his message and to mark down content we do not like as he has to post it in the first place. To attack our freedom of expression while supporting his is hipocritical at best.

Re: Re: Oh noes, not

by falco101 on: May 5 2007

Score 50%

inactive user

All you are expressing is that atheists are a pain in the neck, you have had your say now go away.

Re: Re: Oh noes, not

by andycr on: May 5 2007

Score 50%

andycr

"To attack our freedom of expression"

How are we attacking your freedom of expression?

Re: Re: Re: Oh noes,

by animacide on: May 5 2007

Score 50%

By suggesting that we just ignore things we don't like, and by telling people what criteria we should consider when we vote.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Oh n

by andycr on: May 5 2007

Score 50%

andycr

"By suggesting that we just ignore things we don't like,"

I don't like your comments. Does that mean I should have the right to delete them? No. I have to take the good with the bad, as everyone does. Complaining because something you don't like is in your sight, especially when it is your choice that it is, is juvenile.

Also, that has nothing to do with your freedom of expression; furthermore, the others trying to get this deleted is a violation of OUR freedom of expression.

"and by telling people what criteria we should consider when we vote."

I don't see a comment saying that. Vote by how good you think it is.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

by animacide on: May 5 2007

Score 50%

"And don't vote it down because you don't agree with the message." - SlackDude

Also, I never said anything about having this deleted, so your comparison is not applicable.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

by andycr on: May 5 2007

Score 50%

andycr

"Also, I never said anything about having this deleted, so your comparison is not applicable."

"By suggesting that we just ignore things we don't like,"

If you were offended by people suggesting you just ignore it, the assumption would be you wanted to have it removed instead. What were you referring to then, if the alternative to ignoring it wasn't deleting it?

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

by animacide on: May 5 2007

Score 50%

I suggest that the polite thing to do would be to not post it in the first place. That's just a suggestion. To request it's deletion would be a resort to force which I think would be unnecessary.

Re: Re: Oh noes, not

by slackdude on: May 5 2007

Score 50%

But the question remains: are you marking it down because in your heart the art isn't good, or because you don't agree with the message despite the art actually being good (I'm not saying whether this particular one is good or not...not my style, but someone might like it)? If you don't agree with the message even though the art might be good, wouldn't that be the same as voting a non-popular-but-valid post on a digg.com thread, which I see a lot of on there? Doesn't sound like a very "tolerant" gesture by any means.

Art is subjective, but as I said this is a site about artistic expression. At this point, you come off as though you're looking for a fight. You trying to attack him on his beliefs and what he can submit is no better than someone censoring your right to say what you're saying now because you don't believe in a deity. Consider yourself blessed that you have this freedom...in some countries, people are tortured or killed for saying stuff like this. Agree to disagree and vote by what you think of the art. That's my SUGGESTION...what you do with that is your choice. Free will, good sir....even the "imaginary friends" (as you say) in the Bible were given that.

Re: Re: Re: Oh noes,

by animacide on: May 5 2007

Score 50%

Both, really. The art is basic and doesn't really appeal to me. On top of that, the message is disagreeable to me. The rating is based on whether we like the piece or not, and if a piece has a message, that's an obvious part of any decision you might make as to whether you like it or not.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Oh n

by slackdude on: May 5 2007

Score 50%

And that's fine. I liked the message but honestly, I didn't think that much of the art behind it (no offense to the submitter, just my opinion). It didn't appeal to me either, but for different reasons. Still he does have the right to submit it as much as anyone else with their artwork just as much as anyone has to comment about it, good or bad.

For the record, I have seen some Buddhist artwork here a while back that I believed was beautiful despite what I believe about Buddhism. I didn't cast a vote for those submissions, but I didn't vote it down because the message was contrary to what I believe. Others here that are atheist have also done the same with other religious submissions, and that is respectable.

I figure that if the submissions here are still visible, it's because the admins of the site are OK with it. They won't stop you from posting whatever you want so long as it falls within their rules. Obviously, something that would promote hate in any form would be removed, but I'm not an admin here so I don't know. I don't believe this does that, hence why it's probably still here.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

by animacide on: May 5 2007

Score 50%

I still don't understand why you think it's more respectful to ignore the message of a piece of art when you make a judgement about it. If this was a fantastic piece of art, I might take that into consideration, but I would still dislike it's message, and I would still dislike the totality of the piece (but not as much). What's wrong with my rating something good or bad based on my opinion of it?

Re: Re: Oh noes, not

by slackdude on: May 5 2007

Score 50%

But the question remains: are you marking it down because in your heart the art isn't good, or because you don't agree with the message despite the art actually being good (I'm not saying whether this particular one is good or not...not my style, but someone might like it)? If you don't agree with the message even though the art might be good, wouldn't that be the same as voting a non-popular-but-valid post on a digg.com thread, which I see a lot of on there? Doesn't sound like a very "tolerant" gesture by any means.

Art is subjective, but as I said this is a site about artistic expression. At this point, you come off as though you're looking for a fight. You trying to attack him on his beliefs and what he can submit is no better than someone censoring your right to say what you're saying now because you don't believe in a deity. Consider yourself blessed that you have this freedom...in some countries, people are tortured or killed for saying stuff like this. Agree to disagree and vote by what you think of the art. That's my SUGGESTION...what you do with that is your choice. Free will, good sir....even the "imaginary friends" (as you say) in the Bible were given that.

Re: Re: Re: Oh noes,

by slackdude on: May 5 2007

Score 50%

Woops! Lesson learned: never refresh a comment thread page right after you posted a comment. :-p

Re: Re: Re: Oh noes,

by animacide on: May 5 2007

Score 50%

Giving up my freedom to criticize something is not tolerance, it's censorship. I'm not demanding it be deleted, I'm not crying to the admins, I'm stating my opinion that I don't think it's appropriate for this site, and that I for one don't welcome that message. He's free to post whatever he wants, and I'm free to critisize it. You're free to disagree with my critisizms and I'm free to give substantiating reasons for my statements. See, we're all free. I wouldn't have it any other way.

It seems the poster of this artwork doesn't want to hear anything negative about his religion, and I have humbly suggested a solution to that problem (post on a site dedicated to such content). He's free to take my suggestion or leave it. Isn't freedom nice?

Re: Re: Re: Re: Oh n

by slackdude on: May 5 2007

Score 50%

No one is asking you to, but from the way this thread was going it seemed like you were trying to fuel the fire. The only one that can make you believe anything is you...you ultimately make the decision to believe something or not. You can even say that it doesn't belong here (if you so believe it) and I can disagree with you....obviously none of your posts or those of anyone else against this message have been removed.

I don't remember the submitter saying that he didn't want any criticisms. I think he expected it but not to this degree. And to be honest, some of the comments did start to go the personal route, hence his reaction. Both of which I personally question from both parties.

And yes, freedom is nice...it's also a two way street.

To be honest, my issue with this thread was that it always happens and always ends up with the same result. So why bother starting them over and over and over and over.....get my drift? Usually I don't bother, but it just seems like such a waste of time that could be used concentrating on productive tasks like creating the artwork for your favorite desktop environment on your favorite system, whatever that might be or say.

But unfortunately, history still repeats itself.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

by animacide on: May 5 2007

Score 50%

I agree, there are far more productive things to do. But I still think it's important that both sides state their point of view. It is my opinion from observations of history, that one of the easiest ways to lose your freedom of speech is to neglect to use it. The creator of this piece is spreading an implicit message, and I'm responding with my point of view. What's wrong with that?

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

by slackdude on: May 5 2007

Score 50%

Nothing wrong with saying what you believe, but sometimes the delivery can either garner respect and understanding or it can repel even further. Again, I only made a suggestion. You can follow it or not, that's your choice.

Also, neglecting to use your freedom of speech is different from practicing restraint. The former is out of ignorance while the latter is out of wisdom. I have the freedom to say anything I want, but what good is it if its at a loss when more could have been gained by not saying anything or by saying just enough that was necessary to get the point across? Fine, you voiced your opinion on the subject. But was it necessary to go into this whole tirade of comments? I don't think so.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

by animacide on: May 5 2007

Score 50%

I'm capable of knowing when it's appropriate to exercise restraint. I can't imagine how anybody could even survive a single day without practicing at least a modicum of restraint.

However, when one starts spreading a message I don't like, I don't think restraint is always appropriate. By the time I arrived, a heated debate was already in progress, and I had thoughts I wished to add to that argument. Since then, I've mostly just been responding to people's critisizms of my statements. If you don't like a spirited debate, perhaps you should chose to exercise your discretion and not participate. I know I personally enjoy a debate as long as it doesn't degrade into name calling and other infantile behaviour, so I'll stay. If the original creator of this didn't want to participate in a lively debate, they shouldn't have posted the kind of material that sparks one.

Ranting

by Exciton on: May 5 2007

Score 50%

Exciton

"Fine, you voiced your opinion on the subject. But was it necessary to go into this whole tirade of comments?"

What exactly do you call what you are doing at this point? While the two of you have taken over at this point and are just barking back and forth... Animacide has given feedback to many comments. Not voicing your options because your view is not popular or may hurt someone’s feelings is censorship and should be avoided like the pelage.

That being said, I agree that falco101 has the right to post what he has; I think it was a bad choice to do so in this forum but that’s just MHO. I don't want it removed now that it is here, that is what the victor does to history, I would like as much documented for later review. The more info we have the better choices we can make, if only everyone would use this method this flame war would never have even started.

Re: Ranting

by animacide on: May 5 2007

Score 50%

Well said, Exciton. Thank you for your support. You're right about documenting history, it's the only chance we have to stop making the same mistakes we've been making for thousands of years. Even now I think the ability to see at least some portions of our past has lead to improvements. At least we're not repeating some of the more terrible parts of our history as much, but unfortunately new problems have surfaces as well. Even so, the only way to really progress is for us to face our problems one at a time and move onward to a better future.

tolerance

by akastormseeker on: May 23 2007

Score 50%

akastormseek er

I just think it's so funny how people say christians should be tolerant of others. The people who are here claiming to be christians are showing tolerance. They are tolerating the other content that is offensive to them. It is the non-christians here who are showing nothing but intolerance. They can't stand seeing something that they don't agree with, that offends them, and they whine and complain to no end when it gets posted. Grow up.

There's nothing saying you can't post religious content here. Personally, I think it's a nice change from the 6 billion wallpapers that are some random photo with an ubuntu logo slapped on them.

To re-state what so many people say about every other wallpaper that offends someone: If you don't like it, don't look at it! It's that simple!