Sophistocles wrote:
And if in HER faith and HER religion blacks were subhuman and she said so, would that be any more or less offensive?

This is not a Reductio ad Absurdum, it's the exact same thing.

Look, she is not against you for your faith. she is saying she doesn't believe in OT herself. She probably doesn't believe in hindu texts either, or Buddhist, or Islamic, or any other texts but her own religion. She does not find you lesser. You are ok and your religion is not being looked down on by anyone here. The Jewish religion is beautiful, while I don't believe it, has set the stone for a lot of Christian religions. But Christianity takes pieces of the Jewish religion oftentimes. And leaves behind others. Don't find it offensive. Believe in your religion, and rock it.

Sophistocles wrote:

And if in HER faith and HER religion blacks were subhuman and she said so, would that be any more or less offensive?

This is not a Reductio ad Absurdum, it's the exact same thing. She has said that the text of my faith is no longer relevant in light of the text of HER faith having precedence.

How in the WORLD is that not intolerant speech, at best?

Because it truly is not.

She may be speaking out of naïveté or even blind faith does not make her statements racist or hateful.

Jewish people do not believe in Jesus, Baptists don't follow the OT.

You drawing parellels or trying to make a connection does not mean there are any. You need to calm down, re read this entire exchange with a clear head and see if your opinion doesn't change.

I see absolutely no malice in anything she has said.

Samantha Emme wrote:

If you had showed me a little less attitude in the beginning and just explained yourself, I'd probably not be so hostile in return.

I did. Right here.

https://www.modelmayhem.com/po.php?thre … st17913100

You want to pretend like I could have handled this better by explaining myself, which I did. Don't pretend like you did nothing to perpetuate the situation. Because you would be wrong.

As it stands, I don't owe you any kind of explanation. Your attitude is rash, impulsive, and quick to judge. You like to throw out words without any regard of why someone does something, all the while complaining that I don't know the whole story.

But again. You're right. I'm the ONLY person who was wrong in this thread.

Samantha Emme wrote:
Look, she is not against you for your faith. she is saying she doesn't believe in OT herself. She probably doesn't believe in hindu texts either, or Buddhist, or Islamic, or any other texts but her own religion. She does not find you lesser. You are ok and your religion is not being looked down on by anyone here. The Jewish religion is beautiful, while I don't believe it, has set the stone for a lot of Christian religions. But Christianity takes pieces of the Jewish religion oftentimes. And leaves behind others. Don't find it offensive. Believe in your religion, and rock it.

Holy crap that is the most patronizing and condescending thing I have ever seen.

That's like laughing at the kid who can't reach the top shelf, but then congratulating him on the nice effort.

Holy crap that is wrong.

The OT didn't just set the tone for Christianity. It is the basis. Adam and Eve. Genesis. Commandments. Etc.

But seriously, after that "good hustle slugger" response of yours about someone's faith. I can't top it. You have singlehandedly made my ignorance look like nothing Kudos on THAT!

Have fun.

Cait Chan wrote:

Because just because you don't like everything she says or if she annoys you doesn't mean that everything she says is cam'able and after reading the attacks in this woman for atleast 1 year now, I doubt your 'criticism' was modest...

My criticism of Lisa's posts are modest. I don't have to be severe. Her posts speak loudly and clearly. She offends entire populations. She offends other religious beliefs. She simply offends.

Now, if I were you, I'd read what I just quoted and think twice before I posted again (in the state you might be in}. It's your name. Rock on.

Mnemosyne Photography wrote:
I did. Right here.

https://www.modelmayhem.com/po.php?thre … st17913100

You want to pretend like I could have handled this better by explaining myself, which I did. Don't pretend like you did nothing to perpetuate the situation. Because you would be wrong.

As it stands, I don't owe you any kind of explanation. Your attitude is rash, impulsive, and quick to judge. You like to throw out words without any regard of why someone does something, all the while complaining that I don't know the whole story.

But again. You're right. I'm the ONLY person who was wrong in this thread.

No, you're not the only person wrong. And yes, I can be harsh and argumentative. I never said I wasn't. But your FIRST reply to me was sarcastic and rude, was it not? It set the tone for a bad time. And you did nothing to change that. I probably have some wrong moments in there, but I KNOW you were out of line, because I wasn't the only one offended by what you said.

Samantha Emme wrote:

No, you're not the only person wrong. And yes, I can be harsh and argumentative. I never said I wasn't. But your FIRST reply to me was sarcastic and rude, was it not? It set the tone for a bad time. And you did nothing to change that. I probably have some wrong moments in there, but I KNOW you were out of line, because I wasn't the only one offended by what you said.

And I don't care. Nothing I ever say will make everyone happy. So I'm not going to pee my pants if someone is offended. But it's funny. Lisa wasn't offended by my questioning. She was annoyed it seemed, but it was OTHER people who were offended by me questioning her.

As I said, I didn't owe you an explanation, because my comments weren't directed to you or about you, and I don't care what your background and experiences were.

So I really don't care how you felt I responded to you. I'm just waste, remember?

Mnemosyne Photography wrote:
Holy crap that is the most patronizing and condescending thing I have ever seen.

That's like laughing at the kid who can't reach the top shelf, but then congratulating him on the nice effort.

Holy crap that is wrong.

The OT didn't just set the tone for Christianity. It is the basis. Adam and Eve. Genesis. Commandments. Etc.

But seriously, after that "good hustle slugger" response of yours about someone's faith. I can't top it. You have singlehandedly made my ignorance look like nothing Kudos on THAT!

Have fun.

Adam and Eve is in the OT. Same with Genesis and the commandments. I am saying other religions branched off of his, and its just how things run, because pieces were taken and added due to culture shifts and what not. I respect his religion.

Cuica Cafezinho wrote:
My criticism of Lisa's posts are modest. I don't have to be severe. Her posts speak loudly and clearly. She offends entire populations. She offends other religious beliefs. She simply offends.

Now, if I were you, I'd read what I just quoted and think twice before I posted again (in the state you might be in}. It's your name. Rock on.

It's called typing on an iPhone I'm sorry I missed an 'on' for an ' in'. I was directly answering your post which was questioning why they wouldn't cam her post you quoted.


But thank you for implying I'm inebriated. Cute.

Samantha Emme wrote:

Adam and Eve is in the OT idiot. Same with Genesis and the commandments. I am saying other religions branched off of his, and its just how things run, because pieces were taken and added due to culture shifts and what not. I respect his religion.

Oh, probably not a good idea to call somebody an idiot. Rocks, glass, MM rules, etc.

Mnemosyne Photography wrote:
And I don't care. Nothing I ever say will make everyone happy. So I'm not going to pee my pants if someone is offended. But it's funny. Lisa wasn't offended by my questioning. She was annoyed it seemed, but it was OTHER people who were offended by me questioning her.

As I said, I didn't owe you an explanation, because my comments weren't directed to you or about you, and I don't care what your background and experiences were.

So I really don't care how you felt I responded to you. I'm just waste, remember?

She didn't want to explain it, she said it before. Yet you persisted. She seemed pretty upset with it to me. But whatever. Carry on.

Samantha Emme wrote:
Adam and Eve is in the OT. Same with Genesis and the commandments. I am saying other religions branched off of his, and its just how things run, because pieces were taken and added due to culture shifts and what not. I respect his religion.

Better?

Samantha Emme wrote:

Better?

Too late, I think.

Samantha Emme wrote:

Adam and Eve is in the OT idiot. Same with Genesis and the commandments. I am saying other religions branched off of his, and its just how things run, because pieces were taken and added due to culture shifts and what not. I respect his religion.

I never said they weren't in the OT.

Seriously, are you reading what I'm saying? Because to call me an idiot, even though your'e arguing about the same thing I said, is, well, hilarious

And as much as you irritate me, at least I didn't resort to name calling

Cuica Cafezinho wrote:

Oh, probably not a good idea to call somebody an idiot. Rocks, glass, MM rules, etc.

Especially calling them an idiot for the exact same thing you corrected them on, even though it wasn't wrong in the first place. Such as Adam and Eve being in the OT, which is what I said

Cuica Cafezinho wrote:

Too late, I think.

Oh well lol, such is life. I'll tone it down.

Mnemosyne Photography wrote:
But seriously. For real this time. I need to bow out. As fun and, enlightening, as this was, such as learning I am an idiot for thinking Adam and Eve was in the OT, I have things I should be doing but am not cause I'm that easily manipulated.

Have a good one.

Samantha Emme wrote:

Have a good one.

Samantha Emme wrote:

Have a good one.

Hmmmm, I don't think I'll be looking at you the same way again

Cait Chan wrote:
Who roofied the MODS?

No idea. But this needs a mercy lock =/

DougBPhoto wrote:

Hmmmm, I don't think I'll be looking at you the same way again

Unfortunate as that is, it's fine. I got a little out of line there after the military crap. And I'm getting off the thread.

Lisa Andresen wrote:
At this point I could care less if it gets locked I haven't been able to talk about anything I wanted to since the beginning so whatever.

I have yet to see something you post not devolve into something religious. Maybe that's a factor?

Gabrielle Heather wrote:
holy shit. I had time to read this ALL

Sounds like you have too much time on your hands. Alas, Model Mayhem is not a dating site, so I'm not allowed to propose a solution to your dilemma

Sophistocles wrote:
Sounds like you have too much time on your hands. Alas, Model Mayhem is not a dating site, so I'm not allowed to propose a solution to your dilemma

I think its time for a gif party in here

Carl Roberts wrote:

+10,000

Just to make a few bucks someone decided to take what was a niche for sailors and jail inmates and a few scattered tribes/communities in the Pacific and made it into a free for all scarification process.

Visual Serotonin wrote:

+10,000

Just to make a few bucks someone decided to take what was a niche for sailors and jail inmates and a few scattered tribes/communities in the Pacific and made it into a free for all scarification process.

Congratulations on trying to make a thread already derailed because of religion, try to derail because you don't like tattoos.

Bravo.