The Dark Flower Offline

27 Single Female from Los Angeles       220
         
The Dark Flower
The Dark Flower: Most Christian are Fascists and Bigots.
They only support "Free Speech" when it's convenient to them.
They are not only hypocrites by not practicing what they preach but this kind of behavior is why they are hated by non-believers.

Fascism is the suppression of speech by silencing those you disagree with.

Watch these screenshots to see how a Christian Fascist behaves in a conversation to her opposition.
3 years ago ReplyReport Link Collapse Show Comments (46)
6
hagenduz
hagenduz: Yup, Free speech is my right to say something you don't wish to hear, and vice versa
3 years ago ReplyReport
1
SaturnBat
SaturnBat: Lol I went into the room and its nothing but jerks. They're the toxic ones.
3 years ago ReplyReport
0
TwistedGoddess
TwistedGoddess: So the prayer room is a Christian room? Isnt prayer common in all religions? Lol and in the name of our osiris and in the name of his son horus and lol the sacred trinity was an Egyptian concept prior to the induction and bastardization of orisis's/horus's prayer.
3 years ago ReplyReport
0
TwistedGoddess
TwistedGoddess: I bet if you went in talking about jesus is light and the way theyd still find a reason to remove you
3 years ago ReplyReport
0
TheDoctor394
TheDoctor394: "They only support "Free Speech" when it's convenient to them."

Everyone does that. No-one on Earth believes in complete freedom of speech.
3 years ago ReplyReport
0
TwistedGoddess
TwistedGoddess: The only speech I dont support is violent speech
3 years ago ReplyReport
0
The Dark Flower
The Dark Flower in reply to TheDoctor394: Oh really? Because I certainly do believe in complete free speech. Unlike most people, I am not a hypocrite.
3 years ago ReplyReport
0
(Post deleted by staff 2 years ago)
UnholyReverie
UnholyReverie in reply to TwistedGoddess: As soon as one makes an exception (e.g. for something like "violent speech" then freedom goes out the window. This is not simply true because any limit is a limit, but more importantly because that one small chink in the armor of freedom can easily be made a wide open door.

Using your example with the word "violent", who gets to decide what is violent? Surely there are different standards now, and there will be different standards in 10, 20, 100 years. Language also changes over time. What we understand the word "violent" to mean can very well change (and those changes seem to be happening faster and faster these days). Think of a word like "toxic" to see my point.

Finally, consider a common situation that draws a bit from both of the above elements (different standards and changes in language). Perhaps when you say "violent" you mean speech that directly leads to physical violence. But what about all of the indirect ways? Or all the different sorts of violence that people now claim? All sorts of speech could be curtailed for being presumed to lead to violence down the line, or because it's perceived as "mental violence" or "emotional violence" or it causes "financial violence" etc.

But, even in an ideal world, where everyone agrees on a simple static idea of what violence, and therefore violent speech, is do we even want to curtail that? The founders of this country with good reason included in the Constitution the idea of the people once again overthrowing a corrupt government, for example. Or what about violent speech that calls out for justice for a crime? Or aims to tear down an enemy?

Even so-called "peaceful" marches and demonstrations, only have power (if they do at all), because of the implied threat of violence. The implication is, "We are many, you are few, you do not want to keep disappointing us."
3 years ago ReplyReport
4
UnholyReverie
UnholyReverie: Ignore the unintended winky emoji.
3 years ago ReplyReport
0
(Post deleted by TheDoctor394 3 years ago)
TheDoctor394
TheDoctor394: Alright, here are a few scenarios...

You have a couple of children of your own, you are our shopping with them, and someone comes up and starts speaking sexually to them. What would you do?

You have a loved one lying in a hospital bed dying of cancer. While you're visiting them, the nurse on her shift makes an extremely off-colour and tasteless joke about their impending death. What would you do?

You go to a restaurant and, upon entering the establishment, are told by the manager that they do not serve people of your type and please do not come here again. What would you do?

You have a child who goes to a secular school, and there is a Christian teacher there who tells the children in her class that if they do something bad, they are going to go to Hell and rot in agony for all eternity. Your child comes home in tears and starts having nightmares. What would you do?
3 years ago ReplyReport
0
Ravens Flight
Ravens Flight: Hmm... 🤔 Off hand, I tend to think that this Telicat character is atypical of most Christians. I would like to analyse this in a lot more depth but unfortunately I don't have the time to currently, but maybe I'll post about it in more dept later.
3 years ago ReplyReport
0
sykotik2000
sykotik2000: Stifling & persecution of opinions you dont share are typical of leftists not CHristians & Im not a Christian
3 years ago ReplyReport
0
TwistedGoddess
TwistedGoddess in reply to sykotik2000: Visit the Christian rooms here lol. There are some religious groups of so called Christians that do exactly this. Because if you dont believe in jesus they need to verbally assault you relentlessly because how dare you not believe as they do. Since as most cultish religions say ours in the only true religion ours is the only true way.
3 years ago ReplyReport
0
Ravens Flight
Ravens Flight in reply to sykotik2000: There are many Christians who stifle and persecute non-Christian opinions frequently.
3 years ago ReplyReport
0
billingsguy28
billingsguy28: It is the Christians that are being Silenced by the Leftists! This woman is really off the rails ! It is her type that says Christians and Conservatives need to be Silenced and Deprogrammed. Not a Christian here for the Record!
3 years ago ReplyReport
0
TwistedGoddess
TwistedGoddess: Whose type? As far as I'm concerned believe what ever mythos you wish. But dont shove it down my throat or try to force me to believe in it.
I was raised Mormon. One of friends is a Pentecostal Christian we dont speak to each other much because she is always trying to get me to accept jesus. Her sister is a member of a church that dancing speaks in tongues and talks disparaging about those that are lost or just evil because they refuse to see God. In their practices they look for people to badger and harass for the so called good of their soul. Telling people they are evil just because they dont go to church or believe in the same things is wrong. We have the freedom to practice our own beliefs. I got called a false prophet by a few members of one particular church because I was helping the homeless with out spreading gods message according to them I wasnt allowed to help because I wasnt told be god to do so.
3 years ago ReplyReport
0
TwistedGoddess
TwistedGoddess: But as I said christianity is the one true religion with the Roman Catholic church being the one true way to God.
3 years ago ReplyReport
0
TwistedGoddess
TwistedGoddess: Ever wonder why more serial child abusers are in some kind of place of power with in a church group or religious organization? Now ik some others are mentality off believing the devil or some other demon controls them. But I'm skeptical it is an easy insanity defense to convince people of this. I dont believe in God or satan. The only evil is the cruelty found in human nature. If demons and the devil used animals as in the bible youd see more than just them killing to survive and defend their family or area.
3 years ago ReplyReport
0
TwistedGoddess
TwistedGoddess in reply to TwistedGoddess: My sister's church is also part of the religious group that called for shutting down any business such as Disney land and Disney world for allowing gay pride day. They also called for burning down centers that were satanic and evil in their opinion.
3 years ago ReplyReport
0
TwistedGoddess
TwistedGoddess: Friends
3 years ago ReplyReport
0
Ravens Flight
Ravens Flight: @ billingsguy
I agree that the left supports and practices fascism and bigotry extensively, and I agree that much of that behavior is indeed directed at stifling and persecuting Christians, but that does not immune Christians from doing likewise to non-Christians. This topic has really nothing to do with politics, it is not a competition of who can shrug the most responsibility or cast the most blame. The person in the screen shots, what this topic is supposed to be about, is a Christian who is practicing fascism and bigotry. I personally have experienced it from many other Christians as well. It happens, undeniably.
Not all Christians act that way, as a past Christian myself I know that many are not like that, and also know that a certain amount of them are, I always disliked those, so I wouldn't say that Christians as a whole are that way, but a number of them are unfortunately.

In my own case, I was not raised to hate or consider non-Christians, such as Luciferians, as enemies. I didn't mind being friends with pagans, atheists, etc (all of whom were simply Satan followers in my point of view back then) however I did believe that doing certain things, such as eating food which was cooked by a "Satan follower" or accepting gifts which may be contaminated etc could infect me with demons, however I had no issue with being friends with "Satan followers", and I was always happy to listen to their beliefs and points of view, just as I was always happy to share my points of view or offer prayer if they were going through hard times. There is no reason for any true Christian to try to stifle opposing opinions, unless they lack faith so much that they feel that the only way they will keep believing is by neglecting themselves from being exposed to any other alternative, there is no choice of faith in such a scenario, for you can not reject that which you don't know, nor can you choose that which is default due to a lack of alternatives.
3 years ago ReplyReport
1
Ravens Flight
Ravens Flight: Note: as a Christian I didn't consider non-Christians or "Satan followers", to be evil. I believed that there were many evil Christians as well as many morally upstanding non-Christians. I based who I liked and disliked on how they treated others and behaved, in addition to their moral views etc. I considered "Satan followers" to be god's children just like any Christian was, they were all family to me. I only hoped they would be saved so I could see them in heaven. I had no desire to dictate or suppress them or any such thing... It's hard for me to even comprehend that level of sadistic desire to control others. Disgusting.
3 years ago ReplyReport
0
The Dark Flower
The Dark Flower in reply to billingsguy28: What you say is true about Christians being silenced by the Left. I do not support the Left at all. But I also do not support Christian bigotry. I am a conservative so I believe in our free speech rights. But so many "so called conservative" Christian Americans are hypocrites and fascist in a true sense. They silence anyone who they disagree with and boot those who have an opposing opinion. Fascism is the suppression of the opposition after all. Not that the left is any better but Most Christians don't support free speech in the true sense unless it's convenient to them. That's the point and these chat logs is evidence of what happens often when most Christians are in power.
3 years ago ReplyReport
2
The Dark Flower
The Dark Flower in reply to Ravens Flight: Very nice response! Hope you liked mine too!
3 years ago ReplyReport
2
TheDoctor394
TheDoctor394: I'm just repeating my post I put up earlier...

Alright, here are a few scenarios...

You have a couple of children of your own, you are our shopping with them, and someone comes up and starts speaking sexually to them. What would you do?

You have a loved one lying in a hospital bed dying of cancer. While you're visiting them, the nurse on her shift makes an extremely off-colour and tasteless joke about their impending death. What would you do?

You go to a restaurant and, upon entering the establishment, are told by the manager that they do not serve people of your type and please do not come here again. What would you do?

You have a child who goes to a secular school, and there is a Christian teacher there who tells the children in her class that if they do something bad, they are going to go to Hell and rot in agony for all eternity. Your child comes home in tears and starts having nightmares. What would you do?
3 years ago ReplyReport
0
The Dark Flower
The Dark Flower in reply to TheDoctor394: Scenario #1 - I would take my children far away from that person and keep an eye out for that pedo and educate my children about men like that so they can protect themselves from them. Now if they sexually touched my child I will report to the police for molestation.

Scenario #2 - I would report her to the clinic for the nurse's bad behavior. If the clinic does nothing about it I would leave a bad review on the clinic and destroy their reputation so they lose business for mistreating patients.

Scenario #3 - I would leave the restaurant and not come back again. If they don't want my money, they won't get it. I'll leave a bad review.

Scenario #4 - I would stop having my child go to that school and take my child to a better school, far away from Christians possible so they do not have to deal with Christian negativity again.

I support Free speech 100%. No exception. I would not try to suppress the voices of anyone in all 4 of these scenario. They all have the right to say what they want but I also have the right to not give them my business, leave bad reviews, take my children elsewhere, safe from Christian hate/bigotry and from child molesters.
3 years ago ReplyReport
1
(Post deleted by TheDoctor394 3 years ago)
(Post deleted by TheDoctor394 3 years ago)
TheDoctor394
TheDoctor394: Unholy Reverie hit the nail on the head in saying that as you start to make exceptions, freedom goes out the window.

Oxford defines freedom of speech as, "the power or right to express one's opinions without censorship, restraint, or legal penalty." Wikipedia describes it as, "a principle that supports the freedom of an individual or a community to articulate their opinions and ideas without fear of retaliation, censorship, or legal sanction. "

Judging by a couple of your responses, Flower, your definition seems to be, "I believe in freedom of speech, but if I really, really don't like what you say, I'm going to take you down."

That's not freedom. Just because people have a "right" to say something does not automatically mean they have the freedom to say it, if there is a danger of serious repercussions. A murderer might seem themselves as having a right to kill someone, but the laws of the land dictate that killing someone is wrong, and have punishments for such an act. The killer might have rights, but they do not have the freedom to commit their atrocities.

I say again - no-one believes in complete freedom of speech. Everyone has their limits where their view is, "No, that's going too far. You should not say that."
3 years ago ReplyReport
0
The Dark Flower
The Dark Flower in reply to TheDoctor394: Wrong. If you have the right to say something that DOES mean you automatically have the FREEDOM to say it. If you don't have the freedom to say something then you don't have the right to begin with. You honestly need to be more consistent with your claims. My responses to the scenarios you gave me does not suppress anyone's right to free speech. You are free to say what you want just as I am free to respond how I want with what you say. What I don't have the right to do is take away your freedom to say it because that would mean you have no rights to begin with.

Most Christians do not understand concept of freedom or free-will.
You don't have the right or freedom to murder legally.

I do believe in COMPLETE Freedom of Speech.
You don't because you do not comprehend it.
3 years ago ReplyReport
0
Ravens Flight
Ravens Flight: "I believe in freedom of speech, but if I really, really don't like what you say, I'm going to take you down."
How do you get that from any of what she said? She stressed that she would not hinder their right to say anything they wanted. Leaving negative (honest) reviews about a negative experience with someone is practicing her own freedom of speech and is well within the realm of a reasonable reaction to such treatment. You don't have to love everything people say to support their right to say it. Having the right to speak freely doesn't mean that what you say is immune from any sort of responsibility for what you choose to say. If people choose to treat their customers poorly, they will naturally have unhappy customers.

Would it be better for people to lie about their thoughts and feelings? To say nice things only, or say nothing? If I go out with someone and they find me aesthetically repulsive, I would much rather hear her simply call me ugly and be honest, than to have her feel obligated to lie to me since "certain things shouldn't be said" and pretend to find me attractive. Screw that, the truth should be said, sometimes the truth hurts, but pain is necessary for growth.
Likewise, if someone hates me and hopes I die, I completely support their right to voice that notion to me freely. I'll be glad to know it. If somebody hates me purely because of my nationality and calls me a derogatory slur, I support their right to do so and will appreciate knowing that they aren't someone I want to hang out with. These sorts of things are things which all humans will encounter throughout their life, in a way it can be a blessing in disguise, because it makes it obvious and easy for us to know which persons we DON'T want to be around and waste energy on. In contrast, the most harmful people in my life have been those who pretended to care when they truely didn't. Not saying people don't have a right to lie if they really want, but I much prefer them at least having the option to tell me how they really feel, and personally, I hope that they do just that.

The one exception in your list of situation ethics is the first one. Someone who would think, let alone say such disgusting things is disturbing enough, but someone actually physically approaching a kid and saying such disturbing shit to them, in my opinion should be viewed as someone who is quite possibly a real physical threat to the child and should be dealt with as such. A situation which may pose real physical danger is different from a situation where someone is just saying something you don't like.
3 years ago ReplyReport
1
(Post deleted by staff 2 years ago)
sykotik2000
sykotik2000: a working definition of fascism in 2021 is the liberal left & BLM
3 years ago ReplyReport
2
cowan_andrea6
cowan_andrea6: I love ya dark flower! But an anti lovable God will always be mankinds true enemy
3 years ago ReplyReport
1
The Dark Flower
The Dark Flower in reply to cowan_andrea6: I agree. Which is why I could never love the biblical God.
3 years ago ReplyReport
2
God is real
God is real: i am not sure you even know what the biblical God is like.Most of what people know is click bait videos and propaganda
3 years ago ReplyReport
1
TheDoctor394
TheDoctor394: Maybe we have a different of opinion on what "freedom" means.

Raven suggests that certain words being spoken could lead to physical danger, while Flower points out the difference between some things being legal and some things not being so, like murder. Both of these points are reasonable, but surely just words themselves can still be very damaging and there must be times when everyone would have the view of, "that should not be said"? Having done a search I have also seen that in the USA you have lawful exceptions to free speech, such as hate speech (which, in itself, can be very hard to define).

What about online bullying? If someone had a daughter who was getting rude and insulting messages send to her from schoolmates? Shouldn't the parent complain to the school, and shouldn't the school do something about it? Indeed, wouldn't they have rules against such things? Are we saying that the parent's attitude should be, "I hate the fact that my daughter's life is being ruined by these people, and I want the school to stop it from happening, but I still stand by the rights of the bullies to do it"?

And I go back to the hospital scenario and Flower's response. What it is saying to me is, "If that nurse says inappropriate things to my dying loved one, I'm going to complain and do my best to bring down that whole hospital, destroying (Flower's word) their reputation and, in the process, harming the reputation of others who work there and maybe ending some careers in the process, even though they had nothing to do with what that particular employee did. But I totally support that nurse's right to say such things!"

Sorry, I just can't swallow that.
3 years ago ReplyReport
0
Nevzel
Nevzel in reply to The Dark Flower: Nothing to do with God really - possibly some of the Fascist type Christians do not know the genuine God nor the great love and mercy of God. The other issue is that God is also the cosmic judge of all hearts and intentions, and people who willfully reject the wisdom of God live under judgement now sadly. Some Christians know God will assess all souls - now and in the future. Better to seek the true God than stay under judgement without real peace.
3 years ago ReplyReport
0
Ravens Flight
Ravens Flight: "Raven suggests that certain words being spoken could lead to physical danger"
Incorrect.
To quote myself exactly, what I stated was; "Someone who would think, let alone say such disgusting things is disturbing enough, but someone actually physically approaching a kid and saying such disturbing shit to them, in my opinion should be viewed as someone who is quite possibly a real physical threat to the child"

The problem of this scenario is that, while it was intended to make a point that surely some things shouldn't be said, and thereby stand to support the idea that some free speech should be censored, it actually better highlights the issues with free speech censorship;
Say the creepy stranger kept all of his thoughts internalized instead... Does that improve the situation any? Not in my book, silent creeps are worse than loud obvious ones in my book.
See, silencing something does not fix it. Silencing spoken word does not silence thoughts. Silencing a sadist, a pedo, or a violent psychopath does not make them safer to be around. Silencing a racist does not take their racism away any more than shading mold from the sun will help it die, infact it provides the ideal secluded environment for it to flourish. Silencing the ability to voice fears and distrust will only serve to validate and further intensify those feelings. Silencing someone who is spreading false information will not convince them they are wrong, it only proves to them that you wouldn't care enough to hear them even if they are right. Silencing someone who hates you will make them hate you more intensely. Silencing a dog who is barking does not in and of itself address the dog's needs. Popping in ear plugs does not fix the loud noise coming from under the car hood.

Yes, there are some things that we can probably all agree are things that are not nice/good/right to say, for valid reasons why, while other things we may disagree on. Either way, people will say things they shouldn't say. Silencing their words may seem convenient if you just want to live life not ever having to listen to anything but what you want to hear, which may sound good at first, however... *censored*.
In truth it only ensures that the issues behind the words you don't want to hear will not only still be there, unaddressed, but will also likely continue to worsen while you remain oblivious, until finally one day the dog starves to death, that nervous shy kid everyone kept ignoring starts shooting everyone, the car engine explodes, etc... only then everyone finally pulls out their earplugs and asks, 'where did this come from? Why did we not hear the warning signs?' I am getting off on a bit of a tangent here, but I do feel it's an important point to make.

I'll reiterate, summarise, and clarify; silencing speech, even if there lies valid reason for why said speech is to be considered wrong or bad, can be dangerous for expression is important, and silencing words does not address or fix the reason behind why said words were spoken and can make matters even worse.
Voice-activated phone booth bombs from 1990s crime dramas aside, I can not think of any exceptions to this fact off the top of my mind.

I won't even delve into the other equally important issue of how silence of free speech, even just on violent speech etc, can come back to hurt innocent people, but it definately can do, and is certainly also an important point to remember.
3 years ago ReplyReport
0
TheDoctor394
TheDoctor394: My apologies if I misunderstood you, Raven, in regards to what you said.

I'm certainly not advocating that we should always (or even very often) silence people, and I agree that there at times when it is better when we do know what people are thinking, for reasons you have given. We often need to know what is going on in people's minds.

My point is that we all have an ultimate limit when our view is that a certain thing simply should not be said, and when I read someone constantly screaming about free speech, and then admitting that they'd take someone down if they said something they didn't like (which includes innocent parties), I see that as incredibly hypocritical, and not advocating freedom at all. At least, not in the way I understand the word "free".
3 years ago ReplyReport
0
prairwarur
prairwarur: Dear Flower, You say, "Most Christians"??? Have you done a study on this, or are you speaking from your experience only? I am intrigued at how you can make this determination that "most" of us are bigots, fascists and racist?
3 years ago ReplyReport
0
The Dark Flower
The Dark Flower in reply to prairwarur: "Most Christians" from my own experience luv. I cannot speak for other people's experience and encounters with most Christians. But luckily you're not like most I have encountered. You're special.
3 years ago ReplyReport
1
The Dark Flower
The Dark Flower in reply to TheDoctor394: That goes for you too! Despite you challenging this narrative, you are way more tolerant and loving than most Christians I encounter.
3 years ago ReplyReport
1
The Dark Flower
The Dark Flower: I support what Lishman does for the Christian community and how he is trying to bring non-christians and christians together. I also support Barnabas on the catholic side too! There are some wonderful people who are Christians but there are too many bad apples that need to be exposed. By fighting against these bad apples, you make your community more welcome and make non-believers care more about what you're saying. Even if non-believers don't convert, being on everyone's good side and showing tolerance and supporting everyone's rights to free speech and freedom of religious beliefs, will create a better society. We need to be able to coexisting together regardless of our differences. Learning to agree to disagree is healthy for our free society. So let's make it happen!
3 years ago ReplyReport
1