Journal INowRegretThesePosts's Journal: Moderation abuse against conservatives and faithful Catholics 22
See the following comments of mine:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2999311&cid=40749863
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2999311&cid=40745031
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2999311&cid=40744963
Also click on "Parent" to see them in context.
Can they really be described as "Troll" or "Flamebait"? Are they against Slashdot comment guidelines?
Slashdot is a very biased place. If I praise open source or bash Microsoft, then I easily get moded up, even if my post is uncreative and mediocre.
But if I defend the right to life, or the preservation of marriage, or religious tolerance, then I get modded "troll" or "flamebait", even if I am honest and reasonably polite.
If I wanted to play the game, I could simply write twenty "Linux rocks!" comments for every "religious freedom is a human right according to the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights" comment. Then I would have infinite Karma.
But I do not want to do that.
* Note 1: not all conservatives are faithful Catholics and not all faithful Catholics are conservatives, but I happen to be both.
** Note 2: I _do not_ claim to be a _good_ Catholic. That will be judged by Jesus. I only claim to be a "faithful" Catholic. By that I mean that I support Catholic teaching, support the Church itself, and frequent the sacraments.
I forgot to mention Evangelicals (Score:1)
Evangelicals are pretty hated too.
Well, let's see the good side: the common persecution against Catholics and Evangelicals is gradually improving relations between the two communities.
We are allies defending from the common aggressor - authoritarian anti-theism and cultural Marxism.
I still hope someday we will unite.
metamod (Score:3)
Thank you for the tip (Score:1)
I have ignored metamoderation until today. I will for now on metamoderate on every opportunity.
Also, even though I still think those moderations are unfair, I will try to be more gentle and avoid posting a large number of barely-on-topic posts in the same discussion.
justification, in a sense (Score:1)
As Slashdot has obviously an overwhelmingly Marxist postership/moderatorship, criticizing Marxism here is in essence just flamebait. As it would going to one of the most fanatical Christian forums on the Web and criticizing Christianity.
Re: (Score:1)
I disagree with that. Slashdot is supposed to be a technology/open source site, and the current domination by anti-theists is accidental. It is a bias that should be corrected.
In fact, I think Slashdot's bias has diminished in the last few years... but that could be my fault
Re: (Score:1)
Slashdot has always been a tech news site from the perspective of the dominant part of the Open Source movement, the "copyleft" crowd. It is not news for nerds, it's news for Marxist nerds. It did not start out neutral and just as a straight-up technology site like cnet for example. It was never meant to be what you think it's supposed to be.
And it's only gotten worse over the years, as the Left-wing idiocy and immaturity that's grown here has driven out the intelligent and the politically differing; the in
Re: (Score:1)
Thank you for that insight.
Imaginary Persecution (Score:2)
Having someone not like you isn't "Persecution". Complain to me when the militant anti-theists elect a party that openly campaigns on banning the bible and refusing to recognize your marriages. Or, when you're finished fucking up the Constitution and you end up electing theists that decide your bible is the wrong one (for instance, Muslims), and refuse to recognize the marriage of Baptists (for instance, the Church of Virginia prior to Thomas Jefferson's work to separate church and state).
Disestablishment
Re: (Score:1)
Richard Dawkins et caterva openly campaign against the human rights of people of faith. They attack the right to freedom of religion/conscience and the right to political participation - both are part of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Second, what is this "refuse to recognize your marriage" thing? Do you claim that same-sex "marriage" is a civil right? Why? And do you realize that, to be consistent, you would have to defend group "marriage" and incestuous "marriage" as a civil right?
Re: (Score:2)
They attack the right to freedom of religion/conscience and the right to political participation
Yet they aren't in a position to do anything about it. They're little different than the bully laughing at you because your clothes look funny.
I won't deny that we have serious problems like governments demanding control over who churches can hire and fire or whatever, but Dawkins doesn't even register.
Second, what is this "refuse to recognize your marriage" thing?
It's recorded history. Those who don't learn fr
Re: (Score:1)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-12598896 [bbc.co.uk]
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/7668448/Christian-preacher-arrested-for-saying-homosexuality-is-a-sin.html [telegraph.co.uk]
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/7952526/Last-Catholic-adoption-agency-faces-closure-after-Charity-Commission-ruling.html [telegraph.co.uk]
In parts of the world (including the UK, which is generally considered to be democratic) the situation is quite ugly.
Often true (Score:2)
I've been modded down for defending Christianity, but not always. Sometimes I even get an upmod. Note I've been modded down for bashing SONY of all people!
However, of your three comments, #1 was offtopic (as was the comment you responded to; in fact, the entire sub-thread was). Obviously, the antitheists were modding heavily there.
Note that the person you responded to in your second comment was also modded down, and the one he responded to was an agnostic defending the religious, and was modded up. And aga
Re: (Score:1)
Those three posts of mine are all at -1.
Their parents, which are at least as off-topic as my posts, are at 2, 0, 1 respectively.
So _very clearly_ people are moderating with bias.
Regarding "Jesus was a liberal": today's "liberals" actually follow the cultural Marxism developed my Antoni Gramsci, Herbert Marcuse, Theodor Adorno and Michel Foucault. These people actively work against the family and the right to life.
Second, don't say that "conservatives" don't care about the poor. A poll has shown that conserv
Re: (Score:1)
I meant "donate 30% more to charity than liberals."
Re: (Score:2)
These people actively work against the family and the right to life
The "right to life" and "pro-choice" crowd confuses me. The conservatives are all for the death penalty, do you really think Jesus would approve of that? I don't.
I'm ignorant of the people you listed, I'll have to look them up. But you do realise that the first Christians were pure communists? All assets were pooled. Read Acts 5.
Second, don't say that "conservatives" don't care about the poor.
If they care about the poor, why are they so agai
Re: (Score:1)
Some American states may exaggerate on execution (and it would do good to stop it), but I wouldn't say that killing one convicted serial murder is as bad as dismembering thousands of completely innocent and defenseless unborn children, then trowing their remains away as biological trash. There are more than one million abortions per year in the U.S
Re: (Score:2)
no true Christian is Marxist
That's true, but despite the fact that conservatives paint liberals as "Marxists", they aren't. At least, those who aren't antitheists (yes, there are far too many of them).
Conservatives see the social-democracy in Europe, and see that Europe jails people for criticizing homosexualism
Europe also doesn't have a first amendment right to free speech and freedom of religion. There's no danger of that happening here.
Conservatives would be more open to socialized medicine if the govern
Re: (Score:1)
I agree it is loony to say that every Dem voter is Marxist. But you have to agree that cultural Marxism has a big influence on today's Left. Please read about Gramsci and Marcuse.
The name "liberal" is a great misnomer. If they were truly liberals (as in "live and let live") they wouldn't try to pass FOCA, wouldn't fight so hard against s
Re: (Score:2)
Many Americans reject foreign intervention, yet both the Dem and the GOP are pro-intervention.
Many Americans reject the War on Drugs, yet both the Dem and the GOP are violently anti-drugs.
That's why I usually vote third party, especially in Presidential elections. I live in Illinois, and a vote for a Republocan candidate is as "wasted" as a vote for a Green or Libertarian -- the Democrat is going to win. Bush lost his second campaign by a landslide in Illinois, iirc losing by a 75% margin.
I agree, they shou
Re: (Score:1)
I did not understand. If the judicial system is not Christian, then what do you propose?
I think you meant Saint Paul.
And going offtopic, let me share some interesting links with you:
http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2011/05/a-catholicrsquos-gratitude-to-evangelicals [firstthings.com]
http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2011/04/what-evangelicals-owe-catholics-an-appreciati [firstthings.com]
Re: (Score:2)
If the judicial system is not Christian, then what do you propose?
I wouldn't change our system of government too much. If most of us are Christians, the law will reflect that.
I think you meant Saint Paul.
Oops, I think you're right.
Even if you are not evangelical (for all I know you may be a Mainline Protestant) I think you will like these links. I daydream about Christian reunification.
Not evangelical, but simply Christian. I've attended many different denominational churches; I've been to Methodist, Baptis