Christian's autoerotic fantasy leads to suicide.

[Peikko 1,575]

MC, Mad and Sof getting their freak on. Very compelling...

Have you been taking lessons from BY in the art of forming a rational response to a post you don't agree with?

[Darnell 8,479]

Madame Cleo - I call 'foul' here -

was no reference to Mr. Williams' religious ties, at all, in that article.

NONE.

So - for you to place this in 'religion and politics' forum is nonsensical -

as there's absolutely no 'religious' or 'political' spin to the article.

None whatsoever.

*** moving to Off Topic Forum ***

Edited September 13, 2010 by Darnell

[Peikko 1,575]

Madame Cleo - I call 'foul' here -

was no reference to Mr. Williams' religious ties, at all, in that article.

NONE.

So - for you to place this in 'religion and politics' forum is nonsensical -

as there's absolutely no 'religious' or 'political' spin to the article.

None whatsoever.

*** moving to Off Topic Forum ***

Move it wherever you like, but your rhetoric is not what I expect from an organizer. Is that what one can expect from now on?

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Darnell's action reported. We will let the furry one sort this one out.

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

This looks awfully like a discussion about religion here to me -- the topic is not really death by auto-erotic asphyxiation, but how members of certain religions get identified as such in the media, and others (apparently) do not. Therefore the topic is about religion, and therefore belongs in the religion and politics forum.

I would respectfully disagree with my fellow organiser here that it belongs in OT; I have moved it back to the Religion and Politics forum pending any admin action.

[^_^ 5,021]

This looks awfully like a discussion about religion here to me -- the topic is not really death by auto-erotic asphyxiation, but how members of certain religions get identified as such in the media, and others (apparently) do not. Therefore the topic is about religion, and therefore belongs in the religion and politics forum.

I would respectfully disagree with my fellow organiser here that it belongs in OT; I have moved it back to the Religion and Politics forum pending any admin action.

Good call, ECM. Darnell's decision revealed his one-dimensional thought process.

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

Good call, ECM. Darnell's decision revealed his one-dimensional thought process.

Not to make any assumptions here, but sometimes it's useful to read a topic in the context of the OP and the replies. Had only Cleo's post stood without comment, I can see how moving it to OT would make sense. But in longer threads, one must give some regard to the entire conversation; here that lies squarely in the realm of religion.

[The_Dude 1,142]

I thought that organizers were just supposed to move threads to their appropriate forum and explain why, not inject personal opinions about the subject matter at hand.

[Fandango 1,440]

This is precisely the reason why I think a split forum is stupid. I see both orgs' pov.

Regardless, this is a baiting thread for sure. If you have a problem with 'the media', then take it up with them, don't sh!t on another religion because you feel someone else is sh!tting on yours. That's textbook hypocrisy at its finest.

[ready4ONE 5,400]

Have you been taking lessons from BY in the art of forming a rational response to a post you don't agree with?

Beyond your huge assumption in your title what else is there to agree or disagree with?

[Peikko 1,575]

This is precisely the reason why I think a split forum is stupid. I see both orgs' pov.

Regardless, this is a baiting thread for sure. If you have a problem with 'the media', then take it up with them, don't sh!t on another religion because you feel someone else is sh!tting on yours. That's textbook hypocrisy at its finest.

How exactly does this '###### on' christianity or 'bait' anyone? Are you saying that when the media uses 'muslim' in a headline they are 'baiting and shitting on' Muslims?

[ready4ONE 5,400]

How exactly does this '###### on' christianity or 'bait' anyone? Are you saying that when the media uses 'muslim' in a headline they are 'baiting and shitting on' Muslims?

Swiiiiiinnnnnngggggg... And a miss!

[Peikko 1,575]

Swiiiiiinnnnnngggggg... And a miss!

Yet more rational response. Of course you do not get it, because you believe that it is the muslim religion that is the problem, when in reality the problem is the politicization of religion in regimes where religion is part of the political system. Read some history books. I doubt any religious person is comfortable with the fact that their religion can and is used as a tool of suppression when religious leaders have direct, day to day political influence in the running of a country. It's a little uncomfortable to understand that one's religion can and will be used against people and not as a power for good. However, history is littered with examples of exactly that and the separation of church and state is a bloody business.

[SMOKE 1,426]

why is this thread not closed? why has the title not been edited? it clearly a bait thread directed at christians. it should be titled 'Another fuckin idiot loser from the UK kills himself trying to get a nut inside a duffle bag...whatta DUMBASS!'

[Darnell 8,479]

ya - my apologies for moving it - I'm happy to be wrong about it -

but - if any one of you makes the time to actually READ the article, from the link MC posted

from top to bottom (or use yer favorite text search tool on the article)

there is no mention of

--christians

--muslims

--politics

anywhere in the article

none what so ever.

so - MC included the word 'Christian' in the post title,

does this make it a 'baiting topic' ?

apparently so..

most of you fell for it...

or decided to 'play' without regard to the article's entire content.

-again - my apologies for moving it -