Typical

[greatbear]

Not too long ago I received a really nasty anonymous comment to a post from last month where I took part in a 'bible test' meme that was going around:

You know what! There's nothing wrong with beliving in a higher power. So FUCK OFF, you pretentious, fake buster, faggot ass pussies. There's nothing wrong with being gay and being christian. DOUCHEBAGS!

The IP addy of the post (71.85.6.110) puts this individual in or around Greenville, SC. Having been around various religious and atheist forums for a long time now, the above response fits into so many of the typical, almost stereotypical sorts of behavior found when a 'believer' posts a reply from his position:

1: Poor spelling and/or grammar
2: Usage of capital letters
3: Wholesale usage of slurs and epithets to describe their opponents
4: Posting from deep in the Bible Belt
5: Lots of cursing
6: Ad hominem attacks

The obvious departure from boilerplate fire-and-brimstone screed is There's nothing wrong with being gay and being christian. Browsing through my friends list will turn up a good bit of gay Christians. Some are even priests or hold other positions in the church. I know lots of gay Christians, Jews, Pagans, etc, and, of course, atheists. So, I needn't be reminded by the above quote.

If you cannot state your position (or opposition) using sane, intelligent, engaging conversation and instead must resort to harsh language, personal attacks and cursing, you will do nothing in the way of seeing your point of view. In fact, this type of improper debate only cements my opinion and positions, both on a personal level, and as a matter of discourse.

The dude is probably pissed because he scored lower than me on that meme quiz.

Comments

[lostncove.livejournal.com]

And speaking for the gay faith-based contingent, people like Mr Anonymous are douches. Jesus told me.

[(Anonymous)]

The difference

smart people challenge ideologies

ignorant people attack their opponents personally because they know they have no defense for their ideologies.

saying "Belief that Jesus is coming back is unfounded and absurd" is comepletely fair

saying "All people who believe in Jesus are idiots and should be killed" is not.

you're like me, you have no unfounded ideologies to attack. hterefore, you personally is all the target they got

[faghatesgods.livejournal.com]

The difference

smart people challenge ideologies

ignorant people attack their opponents personally because they know they have no defense for their ideologies.

saying "Belief that Jesus is coming back is unfounded and absurd" is comepletely fair

saying "All people who believe in Jesus are idiots and should be killed" is not.

you're like me, you have no unfounded ideologies to attack. hterefore, you personally is all the target they got

[otterdaemmerung.livejournal.com]

Add to the list of typical behaviors:
7. Inability to form a coherent opposition.

Case in point:
If "there's nothing wrong with being gay," then why does he use "faggot" as an insult? And what does "fake buster" mean, anyway?

By the way, Greenville, SC just happens to be the home of uber-rigid fundamentalist Bob Jones University.

[nlotic.livejournal.com]

Weird...I didn't really see anything in your post that would spark such a response.

[ciddyguy.livejournal.com]

Oh Puh-leeze...

He is a deuche bag in the worst sense of the word.

First of all, as someone who is a fag, and a Christian, I don't get his screed. I totally agree it's poorly written, poorly thought out and just reactionary to say the least.

If I wanted to, I could come up with something way more thoughtful than that.

But I understand their "kind" as my oldest sister is a Fundi herself, didn't always used to be, grew up Episcopalian and I feel she's very vulnerable to whomever speaks and just goes along like a sheep who is sheered is mute for he not opened his mouth (and his brain to question what's going on) That last bit in parenthases I added.

[quirkstreet.livejournal.com]

Funny, my score was really high too, and I'm definitely not a church-goer.

[danlmarmot.livejournal.com]

What's more interesting to me is not the mindset of who posted it, but what you did with the comment. Speculating on their mental state is kinda pointless but projectionist entertainment, isn't it?

So did you delete the anonymous comment or not?

And why did you choose to do what you did?

[greatbearmd.livejournal.com]

By default I allow anonymous comments, but they get screened. I used to have the settings wide open until there was a bit of a spam epidemic a couple years ago. I unscreened and froze the comment, leaving it in plain view, since, unlike spam, it was targeted to the post topic. While I admit to having fun by dragging Anonymous into the light, I do it also because of how such arguments only solidify my position. And besides, if someone tries to have a cogent argument or debate with me and does so with the writing proficiency of a C-average fourth grader, I will point and laugh at such outbursts and give them to the world to poke fun at as well.

As for why I did this, one was for the entertainment value, another was to allow all points of view (which is one of my prime directives on these pages) and most of all, to let others know what I, and by extension they, are up against.

[garebear.livejournal.com]

All the prayer in the world seems to not affect anonymous' mental anguish. You'd think God would favor his sheep and make them with a bit more intelligence with less anger.

[knarfd.livejournal.com]

This thing has sapped my brain. I was looking to comment then started reading one of your pals posts about a film (which cracked me up btw) thanks Danl...

I'm just happy it wasn't me Phil. Ignore the troller.

[baeritone.livejournal.com]

You know what I find amusing? Someone who posts anonymously yet has the audacity to call OTHER people "pussies".

As for objecting to opinions with vitriol instead of rational thought, consider this opinion of mine, Mr. Anonymous:

Most people who believe in a higher power do so because they are too weak to face up to the idea that just maybe, this world and this life are all we have.

And I'll say that while signing my name. Pussy indeed.
--
Harry Baer IV

[sparkygearhead.livejournal.com]

As a faithful Gay Christian, I must point out to your attacker that vitriolic attacks are not in the spirit of Christ.

[bearlover.livejournal.com]

Wow. Who would've thought a meme would spark such a comment? There was nothing that I found offensive in that post.

[feygelegoy.com (from livejournal.com)]

Oy... I just wonder what they have to say in defense of politicians who promote anti-gay laws using theology-based arguments.

Probably, "Condemnation of gays is not in the spirit of Christ! Condemnation of other groups I'm not a part of? OPEN SEASON!!!"

I can easily get along with certain religious people, as long as they have the humility to admit their religion is at least in part, speculation and/or symbolism. Such as some Catholics and Jews viewing Genesis as metaphor, or Christians who say, "Jesus can still accept people who don't believe in him if they still believe in 'love thy neighbor'."

[feygelegoy.com (from livejournal.com)]

I worked up a parody to that post:

By the way! Gullibility is a virtue, but only when it comes to my own religion. And I'm gay, but you're a faggot! FUCK your critical-thinking, intelligent, skepticm, you (lower-case-C) christ-hater!

I was going to post it as a joking reply, but I'm still afraid it could be taken as an endorsement of that kind of thinking.