This is one of the issues that the MRM insists on marginalizing itself on.
If you want to prevent people from practicing their religion, and you want people to take you seriously, you have to introduce some nuance into this topic.
I understand the point you're trying to make, but I want you to understand how weak it is. You're not going to change religious people. You're not even going to be successful in changing the law.
What you will be successful in is marginalizing yourself. Pick up the Art of War, what does Sun Tsu say? He wouldn't advocate attrition warfare in any circumstance, and attacking people who are religiously obligated to defend themselves will work like attrition. For every dollar you think you can raise for a legal fund, they will have ten. For every ten guys you can get to a rally, they will have twenty. And they will never ever give up. Peoples value systems are not just preferences.
The feminists only attacked religion after gaining wide swaths of public support, institutional power, and money. Those are all things you do not have. And even then they still struggle over abortion. They are constantly fighting across all 50 states, and aren't winning.
Nuance can work in this situation. You can insist that two parents consent is required for body modification, and that will backdoor most of your concerns and without alienating potential supporters.
[–]buster2209 11 points12 points13 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]autotldr 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]Doobie_349590 points [recovered] (8 children) | Copy Link
This is one of the issues that the MRM insists on marginalizing itself on.
If you want to prevent people from practicing their religion, and you want people to take you seriously, you have to introduce some nuance into this topic.
If you don't you're a fucking idiot.
[–][deleted] 10 points11 points12 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[+]Doobie_34959-1 points [recovered] (5 children) | Copy Link
No it doesn't. I get to practice my religion, and you get to shut up about it.
[–]probably_a_squid 13 points14 points15 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 9 points10 points11 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[+]Doobie_349591 points [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link
I understand the point you're trying to make, but I want you to understand how weak it is. You're not going to change religious people. You're not even going to be successful in changing the law.
What you will be successful in is marginalizing yourself. Pick up the Art of War, what does Sun Tsu say? He wouldn't advocate attrition warfare in any circumstance, and attacking people who are religiously obligated to defend themselves will work like attrition. For every dollar you think you can raise for a legal fund, they will have ten. For every ten guys you can get to a rally, they will have twenty. And they will never ever give up. Peoples value systems are not just preferences.
The feminists only attacked religion after gaining wide swaths of public support, institutional power, and money. Those are all things you do not have. And even then they still struggle over abortion. They are constantly fighting across all 50 states, and aren't winning.
Nuance can work in this situation. You can insist that two parents consent is required for body modification, and that will backdoor most of your concerns and without alienating potential supporters.
But no, keep fighting the idiot fight.
[–][deleted] 9 points10 points11 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Eryemil 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]WildHuntsman 7 points8 points9 points (0 children) | Copy Link