This month’s Patreon bonus strip is CARLA! Carla carla carla carla carla carla CARLA carla carla carla! …. carla. All patrons can go check it out!
And remember, you can always up your pledge to always read tomorrow’s strip today!
Discussion (143) ¬
[ Comments RSS ]
Loading ...
“it is convenient when God finds the same things wonderful that I find wonderful”
“yeah… convenient”
Certainly doesn’t seem convenient to chop the tip of my johnson off.
Maybe you can get your priest/rabbi/whatevs to give you a refund?
so, uh, this is actually a thing that is sort of possible
http://www.cirp.org/library/restoration/
chopping part of the dick off is a jew/american things. Not every christians, or even protestants do that.
Oh, you’re back! Thank god, we were all freaking out.
https://www.dumbingofage.com/2020/comic/book-11/02-look-straight-ahead/pasttime/#comment-1509883
Huzzah! You did not succumb to the evils of 2020!
Seriously, I find myself jumping at every little disappearance this year…
No, no. That’s titty
Funny you should say that, Dina.
Dina’s using contractions a lot more casually now, huh.
Becky’s rubbing off, since she can’t rub in another way…
Wait I swear I saw something where it turns out a character’s tell when they’re lying is that they start using contractions, I can only think it’s Dina now though I’m certain that’s not it
Ah fuck it was Captain Holt
Wasn’t that Data’s tell in one episode where Picard was held captive? (I think the one where he was replaced by a doppelganger.)
It was Data’s brother, Lore.
That’s the Catholic guilt talking, Amber.
Good ol’ Catholic guilt…
Question, does it ever go away?
From what I’ve heard it is possible to find light at the end of the tunnel! A lot of people struggle with it though, sometimes for a very very long time, so be gentle with yourself if you’re not there yet.
No, but if you’re fortunate you eventually learn to accept it and put up with it. Kinda the same way women get used to their monthly visitor.
OK, I always feel like I missed a meeting somewhere whenever the meme of Catholic Guilt gets brought up.
I was raised Catholic (still am) and went to a Catholic Jr/Sr High School (By choice. Only one of my siblings that took the opportunity).
I will fully admit that a large portion of Catholic mass and Dogma pushes the “We are all sinners and are only saved by the grace of God,” but that was never pushed as ‘Guilt’ to me.
My Priest always said that it was a reminder of us not to judge other people for their sins. “We’re all sinful in the eyes of God, so how can we cast judgment on others in His name?” Is Homosexuality a sin? Maybe, but why does that matter to me? If it’s a sin, that’s between the person it effects and God when their time comes. Why should I treat them any differently for it?
Jesus hung out with lepers and prostitutes and the dredges of society to prove this point. Do not judge others for their sins.
If the message you all got from it was “Feel shame because you’re not perfect” then you had a really bad priest and I feel sorry that you had such a poor religious experience.
Daniel here. Yeah, many Churches go with the “feel shame because you are not perfect” angle, and if the Church itself doesn’t do that there are usually members who have the “feel shame because you are not as perfect as I am” attitude -_-. Gotta love the “Holier than thou” people… -_-
While I still back the Big Guy, I am far from the bible-basher type. However, I have noticed too many variations of the Church essentially use their version, for lack of a better description, as a control mechanism. “Behave in this specific manner! Deviate from our specified behaviors in any way and you are going to HELL!! No ifs, buts or maybes…” kinda doctrines. These are the ones who scream loudest in homophobic ways. In hindsight, the Church & Roman Catholic primary school I grew up in was probably a bit like that, but thankfully I got out when I did… 😛
I find it funny that a dozen (definitely more) people experienced church as an insulting/guilt-tripping thing, but since *you* didn’t then “sorry for you, you got it all wrong”. Although it is a bit understandable whem you get to the “homosexuality is a sin” part. Clearly you got the message “I’m above all sinners” (“I’m better than everyone” for short) instead of the “everything wrong with the world is the Atheists fault”, or Shame on You message.
Did you really read what those two guys just said and get those messages out of it? Because I’m certain that’s not what either of them were saying.
It’s alright. Anger and hate are common reactions when people feel like they are being attacked and their experiences are being invalidated. I don’t begrudge them for it.
Christianity is simple. Love one another. Don’t judge others for their sins. Help others, because we’re all equal in God’s eyes. It’s the most basic rules you could possibly get.
When people pervert the teachings to justify their hate, innocent people suffer. I’m just doing what I can to try and set the message straight.
I don’t care if you are gay or straight. If you had an abortion or not. If you’re Christian, Jewish, Hindu or Atheist. Those are all things for God to judge, and I’m not God. I’m just here trying to do the best I can.
Christianity is far more complicated than that and comes in many different flavors, even before you get to teachings perverted by hate.
Which isn’t to say yours isn’t a good approach, it’s just not a good representation of Christianity as a whole. Or even as a basic concept.
I see. Wether because of my own experiences or because of the flaws of indirect communication, I seem to have missunderstood your intentions with your prior comment. If this is the way you move in the world (through a constant attempt to understand and love your fellow living) then even if I don’t believe in any kind of higher arbitrator/etc I can certainly commend your attitude. I apologize, Lumino. My takes about what you commented prior were mistaken, and while I have met plenty of people with the “you’re guilty, I’m better” attitude, that doesn’t seem to be your case.
Maybe we should have paid more attention to our Latin lessons.
My father was taught by priest or nuns that every dirty thought was driving another nail into Christ.
I also have this mental image of a nun with a ruler going “DOWN you naughty thing” but I don’t know if that was an actual thing from his life.
Anyway, when traumatic Catholic guilt is a really common experience, seems arrogant of you to dismiss it as just a bad priest.
I wouldn’t say I’m dismissing that it happens. I’m saying that it’s a perversion of the very simple point of Christianity.
Love one another. Don’t cast judgement upon others. Don’t look down on others, regardless of your reason.
I’m not looking down on people for having a different experience, I’m trying to say that’s not the way things should have been.
When you have to spend hours tying yourself into pretzels to defend your religion, there’s something wrong. Christianity is about loving each other, regardless of our individual failings.
It can turn into protestantism, I’ve read.
Nope.
I too am sexually intimidated by Dina.
Hmmm, fictional characters who sorta remind me of Dina…
Chiyo-chan
Nermal
Yuki Nagato
Barney Rubble (cereal-obsessed version only)
That kid in Jurassic Park who talks about dinosaurs so much that a paleontologist flees to another car
Nope, none of them do her justice, Dina is a true original.
Re: Chiyo-chan
And in lieu of a Great Pyrenees, Dina owns a ridiculously big stuffed dinosaur.
In what way is Dina like Nermal, Nermal’s an asshole.
Adorable and small enough that it wouldn’t take much postage to send her to Abu Dhabi.
Dina, you’re gonna spill all that cereal right on the ground, those bowls are BRIMMING
Panel 5 is the least realistic thing I have ever seen portrayed in comics. Yes, less realistic than the giant frosted honey bun monster. Dina’s powers must indeed violate all laws of physics, that she can fuse two heaping bowls of cereal in this way, without making a mess.
Well, that just shows she’s truly a member of the cast. Violating the laws of physics is a thing with this group.
OR . . . maybe the granules of one cereal are smaller than those of the other and she intends to fit the small ones into the spaces between the large ones.
That still wouldn’t fit all of the smaller ones in the other bowl
Why can’t Becky justify God being ok with “premarital hanky-panky” the same way she justifies his ok with her being lesbian?
If premarital hanky-panky isn’t wrong,then you’re not doing it right.
Give her time.
One just involves believing God is pleased when you deny yourself something you want, while the other involves believing God doesn’t hate you for existing.
Because there’s large amounts of scientific evidence that homosexuality is genetic and an inborn trait rather than a choice, making it a situation where God is either creating souls he knows he will condemn or where what the Bible says may not be entirely correct? It helps that the basis of Christianity is, despite what a lot of people seem to think, that a single sacrifice redeemed all sin. If God is merciful enough to sacrifice a part of himself so he wouldn’t have to damn all humanity, it seems a bit odd to think he’d damn people for something they have no choice over.
They call themselves ‘Fundamentalist’ yet they grab from the pre-sacrifice old testament or the addendums added after the crucifiction, rather than from the text of their savior’s message. (kinda like designing your car around the spinny rim hubcaps and bolt on spoilers instead of the engine and powertrain or suspension components.) Thus, you have one of the major problems and contradictions in organized “Christianity”. Jesus didn’t die for the sins of a few people, he didn’t do it just for the Jews, or the residents of Judea, or for any single group within that ethnicity, he didn’t die for the various popular factions, the sacrifice wasn’t just for the people of Nazareth, nor for the subfactions of the temple.
He died for EVERYBODY’S sins, including the people who never heard the word. That’s the first thing Fundies often get wrong by only reading the add-ons to the text.
The second, is his message itself, the life he promoted, to forgive others, and accept that you are not without sin, so stop judging other people and be good to one another. “Let who is without sin cast the first stone” too often you get people reaching for those stones, because they forget that the only grace they have, is loaned out. Becky is right, well, mostly. If one is to believe in an all-knowing, all merciful god, whose creation of man includes the concept of free will, and who is also all-powerful and the creator, then it must follow that he would not make people simply to condemn them arbitrarily for being the creations he has made.
I mean, god would have to be a real dick for that, and probably unworthy of worship regardless of power, to deliberately create failure like that, and for a Believer, I don’t think the idea of an unworthy god is acceptable.
Unworthy translators, maybe. Unworthy preachers, certainly. but not an unworthy god.
I actually would like to rephrase your question.
People have responded to you so essentially saying that sexuality is NOT in any way a choice, which is correct, while having sex before marriage is an active choice you make. My confusion with this is that, while sexuality is not a choice, acting on it is. I think, then, the proper comparison is why it’s not okay for people to act on their premarital horniness (I would argue physical arousal is not a choice while engaging in intercourse is), but it IS okay for Becky to act on her “improper” sexuality by dating a woman.
All that said–it’s really no one’s business. If Dina is happy to not be engaging physically, there’s NO reason for Amber to be picking at this. Most people, including Amber, would respect it if Becky’s rationale was personal discomfort instead of God. It’s a bit of an asshole move for her to pick at it when Dina is clearly unbothered.
Amber isn’t “picking on.” She’s making fun of Becky’s half-assed rationalizations.
Isn’t that the same thing phrased differently?
Because Becky is a person as such she’s not always going to be consistent.
When I was first figuring this stuff out I logiced that Homosexual sex was only a sin because homosexual marriage didn’t exist.
And there are legitimate reason to avoid premarital sex.
She might have felt differently if premarital sex and homosexual sex were both presented as things to avoid on an equal level.
But her father wasn’t going to be happy with her as an awesome spinster career woman.
He’s the type who sees being gay not even just the choice part as a sin and not just any sin but an ultra sin worse than lying, worse than murder.
Because she herself is not comfortable with pre-marital hanky-panky (which is a valid feeling), and she’s used to God being the reasoning behind her important life choices. The god a person believes in is by its very nature reflective of that person’s own values.
When/if Becky decides she’s cool with PMHP, she’d discover a reason why God is, too.
*she’ll
Except she’s most likely not comfortable with it because of a childhood of conditioning to believe it wrong. She’s been able to break that about being a lesbian, but not about pre-marital sex. Which isn’t necessarily strange, but it is difficult to tell rationally what the difference is.
I wonder if her take on it would have been different a decade or more back when same sex marriage still wasn’t legal. Would she have found it easier to give up on the idea of pre-marital sex being a sin when there seemed no chance of there ever being a marriage?
Probably because Becky actually believes that marriage is a good thing.
Becky isn’t changing her religion. She believes her religion was changed and she’s got better arguments than her psychotic cult.
It’s like that one bit of TWILIGHT’s asinine romance that I liked when Edward said that in his day, marriage was a way of saying you loved someone.
While certainly no one should get married without certain, uh, training–Becky’s motivations are that she considers sex important.
Her choice.
… what day was that?
For most of the history of … well, history, marriage was/has been as much of a property transaction as selling land or livestock.
I’m assuming eventually Becky will decide that there’s nothing wrong with “premarital hanky-panky”, and when she does she’ll also conveniently realize that her god is fine with that too.
That’s a weird idea that religion for Becky is only when it’s convenient. I think she’s better than her church in that respect. Mind you, anyone who takes their religion that loosely kind of sucks.
I wouldn’t phrase it as “convenient”, but I wouldn’t be surprised at roughly the same events.
Why should her church’s teachings on homosexuality be discarded, but the same church’s teachings on pre-marital sex clung to? Or their teachings on evolution, for that matter?
Is she not already taking them loosely?
Becky DID involve herself in PMHP back at Anderson, I wonder if that had an effect toward the “PMHP is bad,” idea?
Thoughts?
I don’t think she did any more than she’s done with Dina. They got kissing, I believe.
I suppose my view is that Becky views the homosexuality part as contradicting the teachings of “Jesus says love people” and PMHP is about “holding onto chastity to make love more special.”
Hate versus love.
Possibly. That’s a way to rationalize it.
The emphasis on marriage, rather than just love, seems like it moves it into the sin/guilt category rather than just “It’s more special to wait.”
Because there’s no direct reference in Christian texts decrying lesbianism, at all, and the majority of those referencing m/m homosexuality are at the very least arguable, but marriage is clearly and repeatedly defined. (Admittedly it is defined as between one man and one woman as equal mutually-supportive God-fearing partners – in contrast to several exploitative practices of the time including harem-keeping and dominion over your wives as a ruler more than a partner in life.)
What the hell kind of experience does Amber have with religion?
The only religion and denomination I know of that used Latin is Roman Catholic. And while I myself am Lutheran, most of my extended family is Catholic and I grew up in a Catholic neighborhood.
Roman Catholics are the most laid back, functionally agnostic religious group I’ve ever met.
The only time I’ve ever seen any of them get emotional about religion is when someone else says Roman Catholics are not real Christians.
Try praising abortion and let us know how that works.
there is this phenomena of “popular religiosity” vs “official religiosity” and how no matter how much the clergy hierarchy will try to uphold ortodoxy (or to be exact what they have decided it’s the orthodoxy) most of their believers specially the ones not connected or bennefited by the hierarchy might live their religiosity with different ideas of their priorities. Still the same religion, yet quite different ideas on how to live it.
Of course the religious elites hate the shit of it, and the clergy that works directly with these people might just let slide and limit themselves to remind of orthodoxy once in a while, because they would exhaust themselves for nothing.
My point is…. you can find catholic people on catholic majority places voting in favor of protecting the right to abortion and not just because, and their opinion on the bishops and cardinals not liking it is that while their can talk all they want it’s irrelevant to the matter.
it would be a good ol’ world if every major political leader took as much shit from his or her constituency as the Pope does.
There’s definitely a wide range of Catholics– my experience differs from yours, I’d say. But there’s also a difference between what the average lay person is like vs the church and religious figures in it.
It sounds like she’s got some knowledge at least, since she’s given exact Bible verse numbers before to Ethan.
Also, I wouldn’t say one’s experience with a small subset of a religious group can be used as a judgement for all of them, especially since it’s only one part of their identity.
…are you new to this comic? Amber’s experiences have been “3 months of defending her best friend against antagonism from his mother about homosexuality”.
Ethan’s family is Conservative Jewish, so probably Ms Seigal doesn’t think much about Latin. Amber’s mom is Irish Catholic, that’s where she’s likely getting an aversion to priestly guilt.
Sure, Ethan’s family is Jewish, but the rest of their community also gave him a lot of shit and that’s where a lot of Amber’s anti-gay scripture knowledge comes from.
Wouldn’t be surprised to find Blaine was Catholic as well, at least nominally. He seems a good fit for a certain strain of catholicism.
Blaine “O’Malley”? Yeah, most likely.
Amber certainly was raised that way. Though not apparently very strictly.
I grew up Roman Catholic. I don’t mean any offense, but your experience with Catholicism seems…region-specific. I mean, the widespread sexual abuse would have never, EVER happened if congregants didn’t constantly accept and excuse in the name of religion. It was totally reliant on their devotion.
I will say that Catholics seem to be the best at putting on a fake face and then secretly judging–I know lots who pretended to empathize with POC or LGBTQ+ family and friends and then voted for Trump anyway this year. Maybe that’s the side you’re seeing?
My experience in Catholic school was similar to your’s but I’ve heard about Catholic guilt from a wide range of people online over the years and so I’ve learned to accept it as a real thing and it is a thing Amber seems to have.
It also seems possible that having such a condemning, demeaning, abusive father could play a role in Amber’s perception of God, though for all his faults I doubt Blaine ever damaged Amber in Latin.
In my experience Catholics and Protestants kind of operate on this alternating sliding scale between progressive and conservative.
First off are the Hippie Christians. They tend to be Protestant, usually very pro-lgbt and other progressive issues. I was raised by that group, though not quite on the furthest left side of it. (since the furthest end of it tend to make communes and the like)
Next you have the Urban Catholics tend to be slightly more conservative than the hippies, but they’re still very liberal mostly just because they’re the types that are from urban areas like the Italian and Irish American communities in New York, New England and other large cities, along with some Hispanic communities. These are most likely to be the Catholics you’re talking about here.
Next are the WASPs (literally White Anglo-Saxon Protestants). These types tend to be more conservative primarily because they tend to pride themselves on being of a middle to upper-class background that is concerned with propriety. Meaning you go to church because that’s what people do and you won’t be gay because that’s not what people do. They typically range politically from Moderate Democrats to Business-minded Republicans.
After that are the Shame Catholics. A lot of them actually mix in with the older generations of the Urban Catholics but you also see communities of them in less urbanized regions, including with many of the more Conservative Latino groups such as Cubans. (Though they’re actually a little closer in behavior to WASPs despite being Catholic given they typically focus on being strongly anti-socialism and protecting their economic interests rather than religious issues.) Shame Catholics take the church dogma very seriously, and since the church says no recreational sex or gay people they’re against them also. At it’s most extreme you have some Shame Catholics that even think the church has become too liberal, particularly if you hear them talk about the current Pope for long enough.
And finally you’ve got the Evangelicals. There are some Catholic Evangelicals, but by and large it’s a Protestant dominated group.
You’ve been exposed to laid-back Catholics. Not all Catholics are such.
I was raised Roman Catholic and basically agree with Buli-Buli, but I also feel like the guilt is real. I didn’t hear the phrase “Catholic guilt” until I was in college, but it put some of my ingrained feelings into perspective. I have also heard the term “Catholic guilt” specifically when describing Irish Catholicism, and experiences can vary wildly from parish to parish, so Amber’s experience might be more extreme than mine?
Also remember this is Amber. She is like teflon to praise but always seems willing to assume she is awful and hated.
I just checked the comic about Christmas, and it sounds like Stacy is Irish Catholic (and I don’t think Blaine believes in God, based on his mutterings behind Toedad’s back). https://www.dumbingofage.com/2020/comic/book-11/01-this-bright-millennium/christmas-2/
I wonder what Amber’s beliefs are. The way she reacts on this page makes me think she’s atheist, but it could also be that she considers her god different from Becky’s god.
Yea I know of a few Catholics who live by the phrase “I believe in god, I also believe he’s an asshole.”
@Mydnyt yeah, that’s me. I wish I could be an atheist, but years of religious indoctrination don’t just go away. I’m working on it, though.
That’s misotheism, the only religion that adequately explains 2020.
“Somebody up there’s out to get me.”
Or to quote Tom Waits, “There ain’t no devil, there’s just God when he’s drunk.”
Per word of willis, Amber is (at least nominally) Catholic. Per his word, since most people in Indiana at least nominally believe in God, so do most of his cast, with only a few self identifying atheists (like Dorothy, Dina and most likely Joyce these days).
Listen, you can’t just choose which morals you want. That’s what atheists do.
You should instead choose which Bible verses you want and contradict what you don’t like.
Was that hover-text a John Mulaney reference?!
…bread is God is breaaaaaad.
“pars feces est”?
I thought the singular was ‘fex’.
“S’great that there is a god and that he thinks also thinks whoever Becky happens to be is wonderful.” sounds like Willis’s version of “You can safely assume you’ve created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do.”― Anne Lamott “
It does echo that, but it’s a much less toxic version, since it’s not based on the hate.
It’s not really that simple either, since Becky’s God still doesn’t approve of the sexytimes Becky clearly wants.
Dangerously meta there in the last panel, Dina
This is why I’m always unsure on morality based on religion.
Because there’s likely a time when you and your religion will disagree on something.
Meaning either you’re picking and choosing what parts of your religion you use to re-enforce your morality, (meaning it’s just a thing you can use to bludgeon people with in moral arguments.)
OR
You do something you feel/know is wrong strictly because you want to follow that religion. (Meaning you leave yourself open to misunderstanding the context in which some rules were set.)
Well, the simple answer is that the religion is right, since it comes from God and you should follow its rules even if you mistakenly feel/know they’re wrong. To an extent, it’s a guard against the fairly easy trap of talking yourself into deciding whatever it is you want to do is actually okay.
In practice, whatever you use as the basis of your moral code is essentially unverifiable. There’s no way to know to be sure.
I mean I like to think my ideal version of GOD is the god that exists. It stands to reason that over centuries of stories being passed down, dead languages, mistranslations, word of mouth translating, and people using scripture for their own agendas that there is very little precedence for me to take anything written in the “book” the bible at face value. You’re basically playing a 2k year game of Telephone.
One interesting factoid I heard is that some old bibles are dated based on the errors in them. During the time period where bibles were copied by hand, sometimes the monks would make mistakes. When new bibles were copied based on that bible, the mistakes were also copied, and sometimes new mistakes were made. Noting which errors exist can help people identify where and when a bible was written
Considering mases in latin except for the preaching time and giving whatever important news that needed to be given stopped being a thing since vatican II… I do wonder if Amber went to an offshot maintained by people like Mel Gibson’s dad or did she had a particular priest that was super duper in love with latin and damnit he was going to show his mastery at it.
Well arguably Amber in this world Willis is pretty much God and seems to think Becky is pretty neat.
Though yeah it’s kind of almost a natural progression: when your deity is supposed to be all good you’ll probably think of someone who jives with your own morality.
Though some people in Becky’s shoes can in this case instead engage in a form of self hatred instead so this doesn’t always become as convenient for them.
Willis: Joyce, you are the Chosen One.
Joyce; What do you want, Oh God?
Willis: I WANT YOU TO DRAW PORN!
Ah, Amber hates God.
The mark of a true Catholic.
– Spoken as Catholic
With maybe two exceptions, more-than-casually religious individuals I’ve encountered find their version of God convenient not so much in excusing what they do, but condemning what others do. “I don’t judge you, God does,” they say in a way that suggests they want to hang around for the verdict.
The other thing that amuses me about religiosity, particularly the Christian version, is the idea that it doesn’t really matter how much of a shit you were in life; accepting Thuh Lawrd is your golden ticket into the land of harps and halos. If you don’t do that, it doesn’t matter how much good you did in life; pack the asbestos longjohns for your trip into eternity.
Really, having your good spiritual fortune depend on telling the head tough that he’s Da Man and nobody else is sounds more like gang culture or a celebrity entourage than any sort of spiritual foundation.
All my internets to you for this comment.
It’s almost as if religions were never anything more than protection rackets, with the added advantage that there didn’t need to be any real danger for them to protect you from, including themselves.
Every now and then you just get a comic that reminds you how much you love Dina
I kinda relate to what Amber’s saying here. As an atheist it definitely seems to me that the gods that most religious people believe in usually like and dislike whatever each individual religious person happens to like and dislike.
Convenient, ain’t it.
I mean when given the ability to choose that comes inherent with free will why not believe in a version of god that supports if not is at least indifferent to your romantic partner? I really don’t get how this extremely intolerant version of god that ehjoys the self loathing of its followers got the top billing to begin with. Who really wants to believe in a god that actively wants you to hate yourself and others for not fitting into a very narrow way of life?
Yea the God I believe in will condemn me based on how I treat those less fortunate then me, and proberly my grudges against fictional characters. But he’ll only care who I have sex with if I’m hurting someone and could be expected to know it.
Answer: the version of [religion] you are familiar with branded competing interpretations as heretical and murdered its followers. Christianity, for example, has 100+ known gospels, but only acknowledges about 10 of them.
Technically, yes, but the vast majority of those gospels are clearly much later in origin and of even more dubious origin than the 3 canon gospels.
So Amber’s in her sixties?
There are Roman Catholic churches that don’t strictly abide by Vatican II
Amber is not impressed by current-day Catholicism. She sponsors MCGA (Make Catholicism Great Again).
There are still latin masses, you do have to look hard. Some places will do a Latin mass for certain holidays.
The last panel made me laugh just to depress me again.
If both of Dina’s bowls are full, how can she tip the contents of one into the other?
Throw the contents of both up at the same time with a circular motion and then catch the mixed cereal again in both bowls?
But THAT’S NOT WHAT SHE’S DOING!!! She is pouring one overly full bowl of cereal into another overly full bowl of cereal – and SOMEHOW it’s working!! WHYYY is there not cereal EVERYWHERE??!!?!
She’s Dina. She can break the laws of physics…
🙂
Dina is NOT breaking the laws of Physics. Dina is applying the laws of Physics that she knows to be true, in ways that support her not wasting any cereal. Dina is unaware that in the circles of physicists of Higher Physics, she is venerated as the closest thing Physicists have to a goddess. Kinda like Galen, or the Venerable Bede, Einstein, or Baub.
This.
Since she eats cereal often, Dina should just buy a larger bowl.
God never had a problem with homosexuality, only rape and such.
Haha, you clearly haven’t read the Bible!
Leviticus 18:22, 29 – You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination. [. . .] For whoever shall do any of these abominations, the persons that do them shall be cut off from among their people.
Leviticus 20:13 – [13] If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall be put to death, their blood is upon them.
Exodus 21:7-11 gives instructions to men on how to sell their daughters into sexual slavery to their friends –
When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she shall not go out as the male slaves do. If she does not please her master, who has designated her for himself, then he shall let her be redeemed; he shall have no right to sell her to a foreign people, since he has dealt faithlessly with her. If he designates her for his son, he shall deal with her as with a daughter.
If he takes another wife to himself, he shall not diminish her food, her clothing, or her marital rights. And if he does not do these three things for her, she shall go out for nothing, without payment of money.
From a daughter’s perspective God clearly does not have a problem with rape at all.
God also includes an option for forcing other people to commit rape, reassuring Hebrew slaveholders in Exodus 21:4 that any children born from forcing an enslaved man to rape an enslaved woman will also belong to the man who has enslaved both of them.
Except both of those Leviticus’s passages are hotly debated due to the specific word usage not necessarily meaning what it was translated (the Hebrew was vaguer and used a rare word) and the way it was written not necessarily being literal as other parts of the Bible require reading through the lines and understanding the society and common knowledge of the time.
The originals could be about cheating with a man in your wife’s damn bed, sleeping with a male prostitute, paedophilia, or male on male incest (this is based on context of the over all sections). The English translation is not a perfect one by any means.
Can’t explain anything else, but let’s just say that human factors (including how it was translated, values at the time, biases etc.) likely played a role in what ‘was’ and ‘wasn’t’ written to be okay. If you are a God, you probably shouldn’t leave writing your word to the imperfect humans if you want your exact word to get across.
All was also about men – find me a piece where women are told what to do with their sexuality (instead what men shouldn’t be doing to them..)
I am thinking that being lesbian is okay, as the women hardly matter to the .. “men of the God”..
Just recently I ran into an interpretation which stated that these passages were created around the time the Jews encountered the Greeks and more specifically their tradition of homosexual relationships between kids/teens and older men and they found it quite… nasty. The word used for one of the men apparently being a word for a young male?
That’s Amber’s Transformers collection by the light switch?
Like Amber’s whole Transformers collection could fit on one desk.
Or house.
What amber said
I felt that
They are indeed fictional characters and, as history shows us, intrinsically malevolent.
According to philosopher Ludwig Fuerbach, humans create gods in their own image as amalgamations of their greatest virtues. The process of worship only contributes to human misery; people become alienated from themselves through unfavorable comparison of their selves to a god that they forgot they created.
Mass hasn’t been held in Latin since Vatican II.
So… I’m canoning that Amber’s Dad’s church was one of those offshoot sedevacantist sects.
Bold of you to think her dad was the one into that.
Or maybe it was one of those weird congregations who wheeled and dealed their way into getting to keep latin.
Amber’s mother doesn’t seem the “and now I will impose conversion on my family” type. And if she were of the same offshoot denomination as, say, Mel Gibson, I doubt she’d be getting along with Dr Rosenthal quite so well.
Dumbing Of Age Book XI: She is intimidated by me sexually, and her god frowns on “premarital hanky-panky”
Since Vatican II, God has been telling people they’re shit in the vernacular.
I find it equally weird that the mainstream version keeps getting revised to be specifically against whatever has some right wing pundit’s panties in a bunch lately. Remember when these churches would say black people were evil? Or middle easterners? Or Jews. That’s right Jesus’s own demographic were apparently all evil. No wonder Jesus was anti church/anti organized religion.