SunriseChampion
Senior Member
Oh dear. Socially conservative gay guys strike again!
If you have to side with an open neo-Nazi to state a position on an issue, that's pretty horrific. She only started with the brown people because it's a low hanging fruit - please be assured her camp will eventually come for the gays too.
It's not socially conservative to point out the evils of religion. It's a weak argument on your behalf. Well, it's not even an argument. All you've done is falsely attribute a characteristic to @gabe and then spit out a ridiculous logical fallacy in making a statement about the horror of agreeing with a neo-Nazi on a very specific issue that has nothing to do with neo-Nazism. I know you love to find monsters where there are none (ironic, given your defence of religions here), but lay off the bollocks, honestly.
Siding with a neo-Nazi on any single issue is not necessarily a bad thing. The entirety of their existence doesn't revolve around the neo-Nazism and it's a complete crock of shit to bring up some sort of hypothetical aim of hers to "come for the gays". Even if true, it's entirely besides the point here as this is about a specific event that was falsely marketed as being open to all when in fact it wasn't because religionists care about openness only insofar as it allows them to proselytise.
This isn't about your theory on hypothetical motives this mad lady might have.
There, at least we can agree on the fact that she's mad. I fail to see the attraction in following in her footsteps by making ridiculous accusations in defence of a religion that has some seriously nasty adherents and interpreted dogma.