Ah so I can’t criticize them because some dumb fucks on TV (which no I don’t watch) are saying mean things about them, yup makes sense.

You’re the one being critical of a single “Abrahamic Religion” far more than others

No, again, because you can’t read, I’m the guy that GROUPED them with the other Abrahamic religions, literally saying “they believe many of the same things,” YOU singled them out in your comment thus prompting my question, and further singled them out with THIS bullshit pretending I’m Sam whoeverthefuck for having the sheer gall to question that Islam’s trans acceptance is possibly actually MORE LIKE CHRISTIANS than you seem to think. To refute this you posted a survey where there was ONE POINT OF DIFFERENCE between Muslims and worst Christians (and even worse than the “good” Christians no less) PROVING ME RIGHT, but you still can’t accept it because you seem think it’s racist to criticize them at all.

Literally nobody disagrees when you say “Christians aren’t very supportive of the LGBT” but Allah forbid if you dare say “Muslims aren’t very supportive of the LGBT” then it’s “HOW CAN HE GROUP?”

Well yes I was suspicious at first and then you indeed confirmed the only reason you argued me was because you can only question the one supposedly (but questionably) majority white Abrahamic religion. Oh look there’s that group again, Abrahamic religions, wonder if they have anything in common…

Yet another quote from my original response to you:

… ok I know you’re joking, but do Muslims like or respect trans people?

Do you read anything? Because ironically in that long comment you’re refusing to read I make fun of the fact that instead of reading the comment you yourself wrote singling out Muslims you decided to accuse me of doing what you did.

Whatever dude.

First off, I seem to have forgotten to mention that I never claimed Christians supported trans people while Muslims didn’t, so I’m not sure how we got to that comparison other than to insinuate I’m racist for questioning Muslims, though the real reason is because “the post I replied to said ‘Muslims pushing trans agenda blah blah.’” Had it said “Christians…push…trans agenda” then I would have grouped them all together and asked the same question (but you wouldn’t have felt the need to argue it, even though by your link the Evangelicals only support it 1% less than muslims in 2024) but with that out of the way:

But I think you’re reading into the poll too hard without considering the bias itself in the poll. That I pointed out.

No I noticed it, but (and we’re both speculating a bit here) personally it seems that even if the variance is caused by nonpracticing Muslims, still being third worst above the two worst religions that we’re allowed to talk about isn’t that much of a step up, they’re still only at 60% compared to Evangelicals at 59%.

There are multiple categories in the link for different types of Christianity, even split by race in some cases. Where as “Muslim” is just “Muslim” and not at all considering of Shia, Sunni, culturally Muslim atheists/agnostics (something more common on Islamic faith or Jewish faith than in Christianity), race, or recently immigranted country of Origin, etc.

True, but that is more an indictment on the study itself, not confirmation of it’s results nor confirmation of the colloquial tendency to refer to Christians as a monolith that I was referencing. And frankly we do it more with “jews” than we do muslims or christians, where we almost never mention the type unless we’re being specific about a neighborhood in NYC, but there is Orthodox, Conservative, and Reform and within those more specific sects like Haredi, and more specific within that like Chabad or Hasidics, and even mysticism like Kabbalah.

The point is just that surveys like this split and disassociate Christians from one another;

Often, but it does still happen where they don’t differentiate, and mind you we’re in a largely christian nation, I’d bet an identical survey but from a majority Muslim country written in Arabic would actually do the complete inverse, without checking at all I’ve got $2 on it lol. And on top of that, outside of that (and maybe even most) surveys, colloquially (as in people having a discussion, as we were doing before the survey was posted) people group christians constantly.

I was just pointing to the flaw in which doing this for one religion group over another is not a good way to get accurate data. Their is an inherent bias in the way the poll was conducted that favors showing very progressive Christians as separate from reactionary conservative ones.

Alright sure, but again that is an indictment on the survey, which isn’t what I was basing my question off of and wasn’t aware of before you posted it. I was basing my opinion on talking to real people about shit for my almost 40yr of being alive, which is empirical but as you’ve pointed out the study is flawed so I guess our methods are even lol.

The Evangelical Christian population is massive.

In this country, but the LGBTQs exist all over the world. I’m vibe posting rn so check the numbers if you want but I bet worldwide Muslims outnumber specifically Evangelical Christians (since we want to set the distinction.) There’s plenty majority Muslim countries, and interestingly according to a cursory search Homosexuality is criminalized in 35 of those with punishments ranging from fines to death. In Majority Christian nations, afaik there’s none that include “death” in the punishment list, but 26 still have anti-lgbt laws of some sort on the books (likely with varying degrees of enforcement, for instance it’s also illegal in Alaska to bring a flamingo into the barbershop which I can’t imagine being an issue these days, and for one of those anti-lgbt laws: still illegal to suck dick in multiple states, but it’s from like 1887 and never enforced anymore.)

The point is that a massive population of Muslims is more progressive towards LGBTQ rights than Evangelical Christians are.```

But again I never claimed Christians to be particularly tolerant either, in fact I said “they share many beliefs both being Abrahamic religions” so I directly implied they also don’t like gays/trans, nor did I claim muslims outnumber christians in the US, I claimed the muslims I know to be as intolerant as the christians I know.

It’s not fair to group all Muslims in a single category with major bias in weight towards larger reactionary populations. But, give non evengeligic Christians a “pass” by showing them outside that category even though their opinion and population would be a fraction of the whole percentage if they were grouped.

Sure, but I didn’t do that. You and your survey did. I specifically grouped them ALL by their even larger grouping of Abrahamic religions.

Yes. Religious people are bigoted. That’s kind of the point

Yeah, my point lmao, why chide me for it then if we agree?

But there is no reason to single out Muslims more than any other reactionary group

Other than that the comment I replied to did it, and I was replying to the words that were in said comment. And what’s more, again, I actually grouped those singled out muslims with their Abrahamic brethren (and without the “Evangelical” distinction no less).

let’s be real they’re Book III of the Abrahamic trilogy so they believe a lot of the same things as the one Abrahamic religion we’re allowed to criticize freely.

That is a direct quote from my first comment grouping all three and mentioning christians as believing the same specifically (they’re the only one we’re allowed to criticize without *gestures at thread*), so respectfully “nuh uh” to that “singling out” shit, I was replying that to this:

I heard the Muslim brotherhood is trying to trans your kids and oppress women

And btw, I didn’t even mention the women, but in some Muslim countries they still need a Mahram…

Especially when we are living under a white supremacist religious death cult in our admin right now. That is trying to use skin color and rascism towards Muslims as it’s main point of reactionary propaganda.

And there it is, you were attempting to knee-jerk call me racist for having the audacity to question an Abrahamic religion that isn’t Christian so hard you didn’t read the comment I replied to to realize “muslim” came from you, you set the parameters of your comment, complain at yourself not me. What’s more I think it’s very white savior-y to forbid the questioning of a religion because they’re barbarous savages brown. If I can question Christianity I can question the other two related ones, and unrelated ones too like Hindu, Taoism, Jadism, Scientology, Zoroastrianism, and on and on. It’d be racist not to question it just because muslims aren’t white imo.

And what then of christianity? Most supporters may be white, but (without googling, again) godDAMN they spread since they first started in the Levant (which btw, means it was started by people the same color as the current Levantine people if skin color is the deciding factor for you), most supporters may not be white, Ethopia for instance fucks with it hard (and they’re one of the earliest places that got expanded to no less), and Central/South America too, and parts of Asia. If it turns out to be the case that worldwide it’s actually majority non-white am I then forbade from questioning Christianity’s gay acceptance too? I say no.

Muslims get grouped into a single category in the US because we treat their religious beliefs as monolithic

To be fair, we do the same with Christians, often you’ll hear someone just say “Christians” (or bible thumpers, Jesus freaks, etc), we talk as if the Catholics are the exact same as the Baptists, but only one of those says dancing is a sin, and the other shuffles around pedophiles.

Hell I done did it again above, by grouping Judaism, Christianity, and Islam as books one, two, and three of “The Abrahamic Religions” (the three monotheistic religions that view Abraham as a prophet). It happens. We only get more specific when it’s necessary (as in talking about snake handlers specifically will result in the word Pentacostal being thrown out), but typically people just say “Christians” and group them all, pretending we don’t is intellectual dishonesty because we can’t criticise one freely as we can the other, because only one can skirt most criticism by claiming racism while the other is fair game (in fact ALL religions are fair game apparently, besides two of three Abrahamic ones…)

And you do it too:

Muslims as a single category

So we can group them by the larger group, rather than their smaller subgroups?

LGBTQ+ people

literally grouping Lesbian, Gay, Bi, Trans, Queer, and + people by acronym despite the fact we both acknowledge individuality as a thing.

Evangelical Christians

Baptists, Lutherans, Methodists, Presbys, Pentacostals, which one are we referring to again? “Evangelical” is just a grouping of protestant religions that have many differences despite their commonalities.

And finally: Are we cool with self reported studies now? Every time I use one someone comes along to remind us just how inefficient that method is for finding true answers to questions because people do a thing called “lying” on them frequently. It’s possible that those reporting their feelings on the survey are grouped otherwise, as in they sourced their call list from a list of otherwise likeminded individuals [like if I put it on Home & Garden’s website I’d get mostly replies from suburban ladies].

If we are, then “cool,” but it is interesting how it was 68% muslim acceptance of gays in 2015, and then they backslid to 56% in 2023 and then back up a bit to 60% in 2024. And btw, being at 60%, they only beat the two worst religions on the list, “evangelicals” (which again is one of those groupings we “don’t” do) and Jehovah’s Witnesses, literally the two who if you asked ANYONE ELSE “who are the worst, most insane Christians” you’d get those two as an answer, probably not the flex it seems like tbh, basically “well they’re bad but not as bad as the two worst ones” puts them at “3rd worst,” at best.

… ok I know you’re joking, but do Muslims like or respect trans people? All the ones I know have been homophobic for sure and the few I know who I’ve talked to about trans people seem to be the same there. Like they’ll be nice to people’s faces every time and a few even say they “think people should be allowed to be gay,” until you bring up gay marriage which of course is “between a man and a woman” (and in the case of the literal people I’m thinking of, still arranged marriages for their kids in 2026, in America) or some nonsense because let’s be real they’re Book III of the Abrahamic trilogy so they believe a lot of the same things as the one Abrahamic religion we’re allowed to criticize freely.

I will say, as a poor kid I went to a rich neighborhood for Halloween once with this rich kid I was forced to be friends with (my parents and his parents were friends idfk), and maaaaaaaan I’m sorry but it was better by a mile. First (and only) time I saw a full size candy bar given out for halloween. And this was back when you’d usually stay in your own hood and we were trained NOT to take candy from stranger’s cars no less, I can only imagine now!

I guess my point is “I get going into richer or ‘still poor but more dense than yours’ neighborhoods to maximize candy profit, but not at the expense of going full trunk or treat and ruining the holiday, strike a balance.”

I think the difference is that AI isn’t a literal killing machine

Tell that to the Iranian schoolchildren Claude thought were viable military targets (you can’t, they’re dead as hell), and to the people using AI drones to loiter and auto select targets in Ukraine.

A gun is a killing machine.

A gun is a machine designed to fire a projectile, what you aim it at is what decides if it’s a “killing” machine or just a long distance hole puncher.

A bow is much the same, while it “is” a “killing machine,” designed for use in war and hunting, the archers shooting at targets at the range near my house aren’t murderers, they’re just target shooters. Would they use their bow to defend their house, just as I may use my gun that has only shot paper to do the same? Yes, they might, but only one of us is apparently deserving of ire from the uninformed, despite being the exact same situation.

Guns are a tool used to kill people, guns should be shut down and deleted now.

Hell we might as well switch the HR dept to AI, thr lady in charge of HR is just using chat GPT to make policies now so what’s the fucking difference?

Stop. Putting. Internet. In Everything.

Actually I posit another theory, the rejector could have found their rejecting funny enough to screenshot/upload, sort of laughing at their own joke.

I mean I’m sure you’re right and it’s fake, but y’know, other perspectives.

Necro, but: “the location” is broadcast via GPS by the dogbot, “the location” is either “where the dog was EMP’d,” or “where the dog was forcibly exploded.” Either way they know it was the last broadcasted position.

Besides, explosions leave them with a lot less salvageable material, the actual main issue is shrapnel.

Sorry for necro, if anyone still uses that term, but:

Bro then fucking do it. You won’t, pussy, no balls.

OR you have a life, don’t want to die, you know that it won’t solve anything it’ll just make Vance president and further the goals of the surveillance state, and that you expecting others to do what you wont is fucking dumb. Pick one and stick with it. The only people who have the right to say “but we could shoot him” to me are those who have tried, either do it or kindly fuck off with that shit tbh.

Hey indie games: If it could run on the PS Vita, make a .vpk and sell it on your site (like the recent wave of GBC games), the vita modders will come!

Tbf, manipulating masses through lies and propaganda itself is a form of robbing them of informed consent, so even they are not actually “fine” with him, they’re just not paying attention to the right sources and are still being lied to/propagandized.

But also he has the lowest approval rating of any president in history, so that’s a lot of “nobody.” Also three(?) high profile assassination attempts? Sound like a guy “nobody” cares about to you? Seems like at least 3 people do. Constant protests, yadda yadda, yeah sure, nobody cares, that’s why they’re protesting him, “Get out or don’t, whatever, who cares?” Yup, that’s what all the signs say.

Nobody cares? I guess that’s why nobody talks about it.

“Constantly you say?”

The aforementioned dogs. The welder is for the bunkers.

Ehhhhh by then pipe bombs won’t be so passé.

A) They should be

B) Cameras won’t stop shit if what they’re worried about came to pass, they’ll collect evidence that will be largely unusable, because it’ll be crowds they need to worry about, not “Steve.”