Real-world sensitivities and game names

[Gregstrom]

chrispedersen said:

Well, by quoting you, I illustrate that I have read your statements; and I am not easily offended. Having done that, I will now opine that you *are* bashing Christianity.
Your biases - while politically correct in the circles you probably run in, are none-the-less fairly strong.

I disagree, in that I think Atreides is just bashing a vocal sub-section of Christianity. He didn't say anything about the Christian centre or left that I could see.

Speaking of visible bias, you yourself capitalise Christian in your post, but not Jew or Muslim.

chrispedersen said:

For example - calling Christian fundamental groups 'radical' in the same vein as muslim terrorists. Or calling Lieberman a douche bag - because he holds beliefs contrary to yours.

Some (but not all) fundamentalist Christian groups could I think be regarded in the same light as Muslim terrorists - in much the same way, some Muslim fundamentalists are not terrorists. For that matter, some Christian terrorist groups are AFAIK not fundamentalists. (btw, use of the term 'radical' may be a difficult issue, as I understand it has a different meaning within Christian circles)

chrispedersen said:

It may be my misreading, yet I would opine that when the original poster was commenting about jews and muslims being the most easily offended that there is enough evidence to support the utterance of the statement, if not support or prove it.

chrispedersen said:

I believe he was referring to the world wide muslim response to things like - the danish cartoon, the film in the netherlands where muslims responded by killing the producer, or even the reactions to 9-11.

On the jewish side, I think the case much less strong, although the actions of the israeli state, the constant tit for tat middle east violence; and perhaps even the actions of the antidefamation league might support his case.

chrispedersen said:

Regardless; I don't support his position. In this area I happen to believe that all peoples are to greater or lesser extents capable of violence. And to argue who is most qualified is bootless.

I agree completely - I often think people use religion as an excuse to hate, rather than a cause. In the secular world, similar hatred and violence occur in the name of animal liberation or nationalism.

chrispedersen said:

But your whole rant about hate-mongering, gay hating christians right wingers etc etc. is exactly that. Bashing

Yes, but surely focussed on a subset of Christians rather than the whole. If I choose to bash a particular politician, I'm not bashing their whole party. If I bash a committee of politicians, I'm not bashing the Government.