I've seen Jesus referred to as Jeebus and Jeezus.

[Snake Alchemist]

Does that mean we can interchange Muhammad/Mooohammad and Buddha/Booba?

I am not religious in the least. I just find it oddly antagonistic and out of place.

[Rex]

1. Is there a rule against it?

This is news to me.

[Snake Alchemist]

6. I was not citing a rule nor do I think there should be one.

I was just speaking about decorum.

[Rex]

7. Oh

sorry.

[Zalatix]

41. Do we REALLY have to do to Christians what Republicans do to everyone else?

Is what they do acceptable because the targets change?

[LoZoccolo]

69. It's rude, insensitive, and disruptive.

It takes the focus off of an issue and onto offending DUers. "Rude", "insensitive", and "disruptive" are three of the things on which you can alert.

[Rex]

157. Well did you alert on this thread?

If that is your intent.

[LoZoccolo]

158. What? n/t

[emilyg]

2. This Catholic finds it insulting but I'm

used to it on DU.

[shanti]

49. and some catholics don't

i had a catholic hs friend who used to call the pope, "the poop".

[xmas74]

59. I also find it insulting

and I cringe every time I read it.

I hope that someday posters will realize that there are plenty of liberal Christians on DU and that using those terms is an insult to all of us.

[DontTreadOnMe]

122. get used to it

Your religion has been insulting to millions for over a thousand years.

Please don't make me post examples.

[joeglow3]

130. Isn't it great when you can rationalize disrespect of people for actions of others?

[xmas74]

133. I never asked for an example.

What I said was that it offends me when someone mocks my beliefs. I'd be offended if someone used similar terms for Buddhists, for Muslims, etc.

Honestly, making nasty comments dumb down the discussion level of this forum. We're all adults here so why can't we discuss a topic without using terms that will upset others? I'm not just talking about religion. Sometimes we use far too many words in a mocking manner instead of discussing in an adult manner.

Whatever happened to civility? Is it so hard to be respectful of others, even though you might not agree with them?

[EFerrari]

71. All this time, I've been reading these alternate terms

as a way to avoid typing "Jesus" and being disrespectful!

[DevonRex]

91. It depends on how

they're used, really. Like my family taught me not to say Jesus as an expletive, as it would be taking the Lord's name in vain. So i should say gee instead.

But to use Jebus in a sentence about Jesus would be disrespectful to others.

[cbayer]

3. When it's used to mock or insult others, I think it is very antagonistic and out of place.

But that's just me

[Broderick]

4. Good analogies

I doubt anyone would step over the line with the others.

[GoneOffShore]

15. Hadn't thought of it and I certainly wouldn't use the Buddhist one.

Buddhism not being known as a haven for the religiously insane.

[Snake Alchemist]

21. But Buddha definitely did not miss many meals so it seemed appropriate as an example. :) nt

[Warren DeMontague]

161. "The Buddha did not miss many meals"

Er, uh.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gautama_Buddha#Departure_and_ascetic_life

[Lydia Leftcoast]

82. That shows that you don't know much about some of the more extreme varieties

of Buddhism. Read your Japanese history, and you'll find some.

[Yo_Mama]

129. ?????

Missed a few bits of religious history there! I'm rolling on the floor laughing.

There seems to be a relatively fixed incidence of insanity in the human race. So the same mental disorders that will make an American decide that he/she is the reincarnation of Napoleon, or Jesus will make someone from a different culture decide that he/she is a reincarnation of Buddha or Shiva or whatever.

The Japanese syncretist cult of Aum Shinrikyo is one example of insanity in action:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aum_Shinrikyo

Sri Lanka has seen Tamil/Buddhist violence on a wide scale over the last few years:
http://www.class.uidaho.edu/ngier/slrv.htm

Any human ideology can be used to justify destructive acts, and the most idealistic religions/ideologies seem to generate truly horrific violence once the justification emerges.

Then you get the pure oddities, such as the Shingon monks:
http://sonic.net/~anomaly/japan/dbuddha.htm

There's a long history of Buddhist conflicts between monasteries, and by conflicts, I mean fights. In Tibet and other places.

In 1998 there was a Buddhist monk knock-down fight for control of the gang, er, I mean order in South Korea:
http://wc.arizona.edu/papers/92/70/91_4_m.html

Tibetan Buddhism is an interesting case:
http://www.michaelparenti.org/Tibet.html

For hundreds of years competing Tibetan Buddhist sects engaged in bitterly violent clashes and summary executions. In 1660, the 5th Dalai Lama was faced with a rebellion in Tsang province, the stronghold of the rival Kagyu sect with its high lama known as the Karmapa. The 5th Dalai Lama called for harsh retribution against the rebels, directing the Mongol army to obliterate the male and female lines, and the offspring too “like eggs smashed against rocks…. In short, annihilate any traces of them, even their names.” 7

In 1792, many Kagyu monasteries were confiscated and their monks were forcibly converted to the Gelug sect (the Dalai Lama’s denomination). The Gelug school, known also as the “Yellow Hats,” showed little tolerance or willingness to mix their teachings with other Buddhist sects. In the words of one of their traditional prayers: “Praise to you, violent god of the Yellow Hat teachings/who reduces to particles of dust/ great beings, high officials and ordinary people/ who pollute and corrupt the Gelug doctrine.” 8 An eighteenth-century memoir of a Tibetan general depicts sectarian strife among Buddhists that is as brutal and bloody as any religious conflict might be. 9 This grim history remains largely unvisited by present-day followers of Tibetan Buddhism in the West.

Then you have the whole Zen-Shinto Buddhist syncretism in Japan, which evolved into a practice that strongly supported what was essentially a crusade in Asia.

I don't think Buddhism is any better than most world religions in practice, although when one looks at the horrific death toll of Communist ideologies in the last century, it doesn't look bad.

[Left coast liberal]

5. I prefer JC but then again I am not a Christian.

[markpkessinger]

48. If you're not a Christian, then using JC really makes no sense at all...

... "Christ" is not a surname, it is a title, meaning "the anointed one." It's derivation is from the Greek word Kristos, which was a translation of the Hebrew "mashiah" (Messiah). So to refer to Christ, either by use of the word or by an initial, really only makes sense in a Christian context.

[Snake Alchemist]

11. I am not asking for a rule.

I was just having a discussion on decorum.

[polmaven]

34. Or

in any one of the Religion groups, of which there are several.

[ret5hd]

9. how do you feel about xtian?

[Snake Alchemist]

10. Absolutely fine. nt

[Saving Hawaii]

12. Thought it was Xian.

Xtmas would be weird.

[hyphenate]

98. I've seen both

Depends, I suppose, on how many times you have to type it.

[Kellerfeller]

79. Remember, that is based on X (Chi)

being a long-established shorthand for Christ. It is not insulting at all.

[ret5hd]

118. Really? Not according to the perpetually offended here.

[Kellerfeller]

124. Well, I can't help ignorance

If they want to be offended over that, not much we can do beyond educating them.

[jberryhill]

126. It is the X in this thing:

You send me a PM to the thread anytime someone gets a hissy over the use of Chi for "Christ". I'll be happy to straighten them out about their own faith.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

143. Do you charge a fee to staighten 'em out?

Does that go with your leg-breaking services I hear about?

[jberryhill]

156. I don't call it a fee. It's a "love offering"

[Critters2]

223. Ha!

[one_voice]

14. I use Jeebus...

when I say something like...sweet Jeebus... When I'm speaking about religion, or religious stuff I use Jesus. I don't do it to be antagonistic.

Your analogy seems fair though...

[Snake Alchemist]

17. That makes sense to me. nt

[msanthrope]

16. You know that 'Jebus' come from a Simpsons episode, right????

Had Homer used Mooohammed or Booba, I would use those terms.

But he didn't.

He asked Jebus to help him. After sitting in a church, week after week, Homer asked Jeebus to help him.

I took it as a metaphor on how so many Christians do the pro-forma stuff, but don't know their own god.

It's quite a funny episode, FYI.

[Snake Alchemist]

18. I am aware. Very funny episode with Betty White.

I was just referring to those posters that seem to use it as a perjorative.

[msanthrope]

24. Blasphemy is a victimless crime, you know.

I dislike it when people take umbrage on the part of their gods.

It seems to me that if your gods disliked any of the terms applied to them, they could make themselves known.

[SaintPete]

37. You could excuse a lot of ill

with that little pill

[GoneOffShore]

39. Stop using logic.

It confuses them.

[Snake Alchemist]

42. I imagine Theo Van Gogh would beg to differ. nt

[Ikonoklast]

68. And we finally get to the heart of the matter.

Do you really want to put the blame on an entire religious belief system over the actions of a few fundamentalist extremists?

Because Chrisitanity has a problem as large as any other religion in that respect.

Why dance all around your intentions, just come right out and state your position.

[Snake Alchemist]

70. What heart?

The poster said that blasphemy is victimless. It is just tacky to me, but I was just refuting the point.

[Ikonoklast]

73. If you say so.

Not that I believe you for one moment, mind you.

[Snake Alchemist]

74. You can believe whatever you like. That point is also relevant to the discussion. nt

[msanthrope]

81. Fatwa envy. Not pretty. nt

[Snake Alchemist]

136. Not sure how you could see envy in that refutation. nt

[msanthrope]

154. I shall never accuse you of self-awareness, then. nt

[Snake Alchemist]

176. I will forego accusing you of reaching erroneous conclusions then. nt

[Hassin Bin Sober]

144. Fatwa envy. I love it! It fits so perfectly.

I'll have to use it on the repig I work with who says "I don't know why you defend 'Moslems' when they would kill you because you are gay"..............

(Note: saying the Iraq war was stupid = defending Muslims)

[msanthrope]

153. PZ Myers coined that phrase. I cannot claim it.

But do love it.

[BB1]

208. Blasphemy didn't kill Van Gogh

Mohammed Bouyeri did, with a knife and a gun. What he did was not insulting Theo's god - he stabbed him to death while Theo was begging for his life.

Meanwhile, his description for hard core Muslims in Holland (and Belgium, specifically Abou Jah Jah) being 'a pimp for the Prophet' has gained some traction alright.

His death has not been taken lightly. Nowadays, cartoonists are being detained instead of agressors.

[DireStrike]

211. Theo Van Gogh was a victim of murder, not blasphemy. -nt-

[Snake Alchemist]

212. That's a bit like saying someone was a victim of a bullet and not a gun. nt

[DireStrike]

226. No it isnt.

That's not even close. You need to work on your analogies.

[Snake Alchemist]

227. Yes it is. No I do not :). nt

[adigal]

86. They could smite the heathens who say Jebus!!

Think they will??

[msanthrope]

90. I suspect 'fatwa envy' is very real on the part of some wingnut Xtians.

I truly believe that the Bachmann/Perry/Gingrich type of Christian deeply regrets that smiting seems to have been left off in the Old Testament.

[pinto]

19. When used derogatorily, I think it's unneccessary and petty.

Yet a key, of sorts, to the ensuing level of discussion...so I take the use with a grain of salt.

[grantcart]

20. Well when you go into a restaurant and find that you need to wait at the bar

for your friends to show up and end up in the 'Jesus' room instead of the 'Buddha' room let me know.

For the record I agree but then I don't like the habitual 'Repukes' et all either.

[Ruby the Liberal]

102. +1

I thought maybe I was the only one. It lowers us to Freeper level, IMO, but to each his own.

[Archae]

22. Even "Jesus" isn't his real name.

The early church in a fit of anti-Semitism made the Greek version of the original "Jeshua" the official name.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

83. Actually, no, the New Testament was first written in Greek

so they used the Greek forms of all the names. Greek was the international language of the region in those days. It's how the Romans and the Jews and everyone else in the Middle East would have talked to anyone who didn't speak the same native language.

It's sort of like English speakers referring to "Joan of Arc" instead of "Jeanne d'Arc."

[Ikonoklast]

23. Jeebus is the person who hates the poor, the sick, and the imprisoned.

Jeebus is the person that the mega-church prosperity gospel shit-slinging con artists pray to.

Jeebus is asked to smite homosexuals, Jews, minorities, women, Democrats and other Christian sects not their own.

Jeebus has little to do with religion, and everything to do with power, money, and control.

He has nothing to do with actual Christians, or the person written about in the Gospels.

[treestar]

30. I never realized where it came from until this thread

But I like that idea - Jeebus is what the right wing promotes, therefore not the real thing.

[Bluenorthwest]

31. Well put.

The guy in the Gospels was named Josh anyway....

[hlthe2b]

36. i like that definition and distinction...

[Snake Alchemist]

38. I just haven't seen anything similar for those that pervert the teachings of Muhammad. nt.

[GoneOffShore]

107. Ask Dan Savage to write a column about it.

His readers came up with the present definition of santorum after all.

[JoePhilly]

62. +1

[msongs]

25. perhaps we should burn all blaspemers at the stake - The UN etc are heading that direction nt

[Bluenorthwest]

26. Jeebus is a Simpson's reference. The joke is on Homer.

Homer: "I can't be a missionary, I don't even believe in Jebus"

[spanone]

27. lighten up, francis

[lpbk2713]

28. An alternate form is 'chayssus'.

When speaking in televangelese.

[sharp_stick]

29. Personally

I don't care how one refers to mythical images of any stripe. Praise be to Odin!

[Archae]

33. Don't you mean Woden?

That is the guy we celebrate on "Woden's Day."
(Wednesday)

[left coaster]

44. DING DING DING DING! Agreed. nt

[hlthe2b]

32. When I say "Geebus" I am specifically NOT referring to Jesus...

Ditto when I say "Gawd" Ditto when I refer to Ratzinger, rather than the Pope because 1. I have no respect for Ratzinger, but 2. I do respect Catholics and their right to their beliefs, including their honoring of the Pope as an important figure in their religious hierarchy.

On the other hand, I would find it hard to interpret your two examples as other than intentionally derisional...

That makes sense to me.. Perhaps not to you.

[hfojvt]

35. doesn't bother me

and Moo-hamad seems like it would be appropriate considering the 2nd chapter of the Koran is titled "The Cow".

[Snake Alchemist]

40. You've given me an interesting idea for chocolate milk company. nt

[The Straight Story]

43. On Halloween he is BooHammad, and he likes bacon wrapped sheep (nt)

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

45. "Sacred cows make the best hamburger." Mark Twain

[zbdent]

46. Ba Ba Buddha! Ba Ba Buddha! Ba Ba Buddha!

[Gregorian]

47. I'm recommending because I think it's an interesting question. I find it antogonistic and funny.

It depends upon how seriously I take my beliefs.

[Drale]

50. When you can't laugh at your self who can you laugh at?

When a religon loses its sense of humor the entire world is fucked.

[AtomicKitten]

51. Considering the historical oppression perpetrated in the name of a mythical sky fairy,

blasphemy is a legitimate response.

[markpkessinger]

52. As an Episcopalian, I'm not in the least offended...

... because I know that in most cases, when those terms are used, they are used to make fun of the Jesus the religious right continually makes up in its own image, and not the real thing. And any mockery the religious right gets is well deserved.

[hyphenate]

106. Amen!

(from an atheist!)

[kwassa]

138. As an Episcopalian, I am offended.

but not very much because the people that use these terms are usually wildly ignorant on a factual basis about religion, Christianity, and many other subjects.

I don't get upset about the opinions of people who don't know anything, unless they are in positions of power.

[Shadowflash]

53. I suppose that

When my rights are respected by religious people not trying to cram their fairytale edicts down my throat in the form of laws and such then I'll consider being more respectful to said fairytale belief.

[customerserviceguy]

65. +1 n/t

[SammyWinstonJack]

184. Excellent!

[Raffi Ella]

206. Preach it, Shadowflash.

[malaise]

239. Ding ding we have a winner

[we can do it]

54. You Forgot Jaysus!

[DevonRex]

55. I think it is unnecessarily rude. nt

[Scootaloo]

56. Let's see what Tommy Lee Jones has to say about it

[img][/img]

[The Doctor.]

57. When Muslims in this country start behaving the way most 'Christians' do

Then I'll certainly entertain the notion myself.

In the meanwhile, I'll save my derision for those that have earned it.

[Ruby the Liberal]

99. Seriously?

So you believe that broad brush slaps are completely appropriate because you might disagree with what some segment said?

Thats an interesting approach to an internet community.

[Rex]

225. LOL!

[The Doctor.]

237. When a large group of people make asses of themselves the way so many Christians have,

I will make fun of those people.

I suppose I didn't make a clear enough distinction.

[Ruby the Liberal]

238. No, you didn't and no, you haven't.

Do realize that some of "those people" (ie, Christians) walk among you here and share your politics, goals and causes.

[The Doctor.]

245. Then I'm not talking about them.

I can see now that I made a mistake in thinking that the failure to make such a simple distinction was my fault.

[Ruby the Liberal]

246. That is the problem with stereotypes and blanket statements

they don't take that into account.

Yeah, it takes a few extra seconds to add "those" or "some" or some other qualifier, but it can go along way - especially with people who would normally be agreeing with you, feeling affronted by you.

Most (I would hope) of us HERE are on the same page....

[kwolf68]

230. Mulsims no better

Ahh the good loving Muslims. If Muslims had the same kind of power Christians have in this country, you can bet your ass they'd act the same way, or worse. I am NOT fan of modern day evangelicals, but Muslims are sure as hell no damn better and when taken to extremes both religions are complete pariahs.

[ZombieHorde]

58. Mooohammad is pretty funny.

Booba isn't bad.

[JoePhilly]

61. How about "Badda Bing Badda Buddha" ??

Could be used when an extreme right wing Buddhist (?) totally misinterprets the actual Buddha's teachings.

[ZombieHorde]

64. That made me laugh, but I can be pretty immature. nt

[JoePhilly]

119. me too ...

my kids love it ... drives my wife crazy!!

[Ikonoklast]

76. Sounds like a good name for a fast-food vegetarian restaurant...run by The Mob.

[JoePhilly]

120. Maybe an Indian - Italian Fusion restaurant.

[KT2000]

60. Not the same

fundamentalist christianity - the rule of the christian god and Jesus - is a political weapon now. The other religions are not.

I always find the use of "Jeebus" funny.

[Renew Deal]

63. The other one I've seen is God vs. Dog

I think it's meant to be offensive.

[Honeycombe8]

66. I hadn't seen those posts, but I agree. Disrespect to others' religion is not cool. nt

[NYC Liberal]

67. Why? He's not the only person for whom we have 'nicknames'.

[haele]

72. Blasphamy is in the ear of the auditor.

Some people, myself included, do not like to causually use the name of an active diety that many people still claim have proscriptions against "using his/her/it's name in vain". Just because I'm polite that way.

Call me old-fashioned, but I still taste Lava soap in my mouth occasionally when swearing in a way that might cause offense to some people.

So unless I'm directly discussing the philosopies of an Aramaic biblical diety - because their followers tend to have the most problem with casual use of the names of their gods and prophits, I tend to use the terms "Gawd" and "Jaysus".

Haele

[Warpy]

75. I occasionally use Jebus

to differentiate the prosperity theology god figure from the one I read about when I read the bible. The former is a fake, Supply Side Jebus. The latter was a raving socialist hellraiser and rabblerouser, Jesus.

It's just a bit of shorthand. I'm an atheist, but that cat in the NT had a lot of fine ideas for getting along with each other and people could do far worse than try to put them into action. That idiot they fulminate about in right wing churches just isn't the real thing and shouldn't be able to steal his name.

[riderinthestorm]

77. My understanding is it's very common progressive slang referencing religious right Rethugs.

From the urban dictionary site however there are more than a few references as to why people may or may not use jeebus (some of them use it so they DON'T take the Lord's name in vain - its a way of honoring the real Jesus Christ!)

1. "A name used on progressive blogs to deride intolerant religious rightwingers ("fundies&quot who use the Christian faith as a flag and front for every one of their nastiest motivations, statements and actions, hiding hate behind professed faith. Basically "jeebus" is a code word for lefties permitting them to mock self-annointed religious frothing biters / ultraconservatives of the social or financial right who advocate selfishness and cruelty (via nutty religious errors) without actually deriding Jesus or Christianity itself which they don't have a problem with. Put alternatively, a person who follows the New Testament loves Jesus; a person who can't wait to take away sick benefits from a dying lesbian because God Hates Fags loves Jeebus. Get the diff?"

snip

2."I love people wo think that homer invented jeebus, you're all so cute. i congratulate the people who say frank zappa, buy I have to tell y'all it was used by Duke Ellington (1930's jazz writer/singer) in a throwback to his catholic school days. He used it instead of jesus so that the nuns couldn't beat him, or whatever it is that angry nuns do. he used it instead of jesus for the rest of his life, which is where zappa probably found it."

snip

3. "Not homer originally, this word dates back to the late 1800's as a way of saying jesus without actually taking the name in vain.
similar to words like jeepers creepers, jeebus is also a form of pronunciation.

Sorry folks Matt G. is not the originator of all. He merely recycles pop culture into a half hour show."

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=jeebus


So relax!!

[cherokeeprogressive]

78. I wonder why no one uses it to mock President Obama with...

That's strange to me. Everyone else who claims to have faith is said to be praying to the flying spaghetti monster, jebus, gawd, or some stupid shit like that. Let President Obama go to church though and no one even blinks.

Hypocricy abounds.

He tells the Chicago Daily Tribune "I’m a Christian. And so, although I try not to have my religious beliefs dominate or determine my political views on this issue, I do believe that tradition, and my religious beliefs say that marriage is something sanctified between a man and a woman." and people call him the greatest president who's ever held the office.

Hypocricy abounds.

[msanthrope]

89. Because we atheists know what rendering unto Caesar means. nt

[bvar22]

80. I do this frequently.

The reason is that I respect the the person know historically as "Jesus",
and have deep respect for the values he personified.

OTOH: I have mocking disrespect for the cartoon creation that the fundamentalist Organized Christian Churches (including the Catholic Church) have hi-jacked and modified to furhter their worldly pursuits.



The "Jesus" claimed by the fundamentalist Organized Churches that hoard money & power is in no way the same "Jesus" that has been recorded in the old documents.
Hence, I will NOT help them hi-Jack HIS name to further their worldly goals.
When I use "baby jeebus", it is done so intentionally to mock their hypocrisy.

I will continue to do so.
If anyone doesn't like it,
pray to "baby jeebus" to come down and stop me.
If enough of you get together and pray loud enough,
you CAN control "baby jeebus", and get him to do your worldly will.



You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.
[font size=5 color=green][center]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/center]

[tabasco]

84. Yes.

Any more questions?

[madamesilverspurs]

85. Concur.

Infantile, unseemly, and utterly in keeping with how Limbaugh does his shtick. We keep telling ourselves that we're better than that. . .

[Broderick]

87. Agree

It's not funny and it's old in my opinion.

[Cleita]

88. I dunno.

I think we can poke fun at our own Christian culture. Jews make fun of Jewish culture all the time, but it would be very uncool for a non-Jew to do so.

[cleanhippie]

213. Wait, I thought Christians belonged to Jesus, not the other way around?

Maybe that misunderstanding is just where the problem is...

[hyphenate]

93. Feel free to call any god what you wish to

Part of your first amendment rights.

The only thing you shouldn't do is to deprive someone else of their religious beliefs, unless those rights are interfering with our government and its administration.

I don't give a crap, personally, what anyone believes, but if there are people who are 1) trying to coerce school districts to teach creationism, 2) trying to convert people by forceful proselytizing, 3) trying to make others believe this is a "christian" nation, then you're stepping on my religious rights.

Otherwise, go for it.

[leftyohiolib]

94. why are there 2 of these post from 2 different posters but with the exact wording - see link

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1222331

[dems_rightnow]

96. The second poster copied and pasted?

They wanted to talk about it in another forum.

[Broderick]

97. Yep

Trying to open up the dialogue in another forum.

[leftyohiolib]

101. duh. or i guess i should say D'oh- i shoulda figured that out on my own

[xmas74]

135. GD posts can go by fast

and get lost quickly.

I thought it might be an interesting discussion in the Christian Liberals group, where it wouldn't be lost from the front page for a few days.

I posted a direct link, thinking others in that group might be interested in the topic at hand.

[ZombieHorde]

103. Skinner has 27 sock puttets, which can get confusing for just about anyone.

(just kidding)

[tawadi]

105. How do you know this?

[ZombieHorde]

109. That was a joke. Sorry for the confusion; I thought the large number made it obvious.

I will edit my post to avoid future misunderstandings.

[tawadi]

111. Oh

Everyone else probably knew this.

[ZombieHorde]

117. I fall for similar shit all the time.

I should have included a disclaimer.

[Critters2]

224. He must be one of 'em.

[Warren DeMontague]

128. I know someone who has more.

Just kidding.

No, I'm serious.

You're funny!

Right On!

Back atcha.





Word.

I feel exactly the same way.

[Nye Bevan]

95. Unlike some religions, people don't tend to get blown up

for making fun of Christianity. I can't even remember the last time the Pope or Archbishop of Canterbury issued a fatwa.

[Heywood J]

170. Go take a walk around Belfast and tell me that with a straight face. (NT)

[Nye Bevan]

179. So the Irish troubles were about killing people in the name of Christianity,

and not about British control of Northern Ireland?

Interesting take.

[countryjake]

100. Most use terms like jeebus & jeezus to try not to be antagonistic...

at least, that's why I do it.

Of course, I've been known to use jeepers quite a lot, too, or say something like jeesh when I'm mildly dismayed. Back in the day, every single one of those terms was considered blasphemous to particularly strict adherents until the ridiculousness of it all finally won out and the fundamentalists took to quietly steaming over disregard for their commandments by themselves, rather than attacking or attempting to punish anyone for what they might deem as an insult.

Nowadays, with religious fanatics worldwide taking umbrage over both extremely minor and actual serious offense, without qualification, I've taken to using my personal favorite exclamation, which pretty much sums up how I feel about extreme belief in all things supernatural:

Jesus Christ on a Trailer Hitch!

[msanthrope]

155. I refrained from posting this. Yet, I am so glad you did....nt

[tawadi]

104. Now you've done it

[GoneOffShore]

108. You got some butter for that?

How about ?

[xfundy]

110. Is Jesus male? Can you see him?

If (of course) the answers are yes & no, he's an invisible man--is he not?

I suspect you came around here only to antagonize and obfuscate. You have your beliefs, I have mine. Does one of us have to "win?"

[LeftyMom]

112. If he's offended, he can speak up.

[cleanhippie]

214. +1

[MzShellG]

113. To put things in perspective.......

To some people calling Jesus a blasphemous name is just as offensive as calling gay man the 'F' word or calling a black person the 'N' word. I wish some folks around here would be a little more sensitive to others.

[Broderick]

114. agree

That is a great way of putting it.

[emilyg]

123. Thank you.

[piratefish08]

127. to Jewish folks his Hebrew name was Yeshua. translated to to English it is Joshua.

Translated from Hebrew to Greek then then to English his name became Jesus.

some people would say that calling him Jesus is offensive. maybe even a blasphemous misspelling. are you not sensitive to their feelings?



by the way - referencing a historical figure who lived 2000+ years ago with a comical misspelling of his name does NOT EQUATE to de-humanizing a living breathing human being with nasty names and labels. it's not even in the same category. why do Christians alway have to be victims?

your beliefs are not automatically due reverence by the remainder of society. it simply doesn't work that way.

are you truly so offended by JEEBUS that it equates to what a black person would feel by being called the N word? is that what your post is saying?

perspective, indeed.

[harmonicon]

171. "Why do Christians always have to be victims?" Read what Nietzsche had to say about it.

He basically summed it up as their being two types of morality: noble morality, and slave morality. (though he said that these are hypothetical extremes).

Noble morality states that what one does is moral simply because they do it; what the king says is law is law, etc.

Slave morality he based on Judaism, basically to mean that "we are in the right, because we are oppressed." This is related to original sin, etc.

One thing I find particularly interesting about the new Christian right is how they've changed this. They now seem to simply argue that they are always in the right because they are Christian, no matter what the bible may actually contain. They now trump the bible and the church's historical teachings and will alter them to sort whatever their whim is at the time.

[Logical]

147. Not the same at all

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

115. "Can," of course.

"We," not so much.

[LadyHawkAZ]

116. I mostly do it to distinguish between

people who actually follow Jesus and his teachings (and who rarely make the news) and people who just like to wave the JEEZUS! banner to give their bullshit some fake credibility.

[obamanut2012]

121. "Jeebus" is from an old "Simpsons" episode

When Homer became a missionary, and called Jesus, "Jeebus."

"Geez" and "Gee Whiz" are the same as both terms you mentioned. Do you believe they should also be discontinued? Serious question.

[Warren DeMontague]

125. When you insult the Booba, you're only insulting yourself.

But, really, deeper understanding of cosmological and existential mysteries isn't exactly Western Monotheism's strong suit, IMHO.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

132. Buddha is not a god, he is a human.

do your research.

Prince Gautama, the Buddha, was a man who became enlightened. He is not a god.

[Warren DeMontague]

151. Actually, my point was, you're supposed to find the Buddha (or the Buddha-nature) in the mirror.

You know, if you meet the Buddha on the road, etc. etc.

(My point about "Western Monotheism" was about Western Monotheism- i.e. Judaism, Christianity, Islam- not Buddhism. That probably could have been more clear)

Believe it or not, I do have a bit of understanding around these things, but thanks.

[backscatter712]

131. These days, I prefer Futurama-isms...

Sweet Zombie Jesus!!!

[eridani]

134. The reason I do that is that I really don't like using "Jesus" as a swear word

--or any kind ot interjection. That is what seems insulting to me, so I don't do it. Jeebus! or Jeezus H Keerist! are ways of avoiding using the actual name.

[undeterred]

139. But its exactly the same thing.

Who ya foolin?

[eridani]

152. Avoiding the name is the same as using it?

On what planet?

[undeterred]

219. Its almost more disrespectful on my planet.

But hey, that's just me.

[undeterred]

137. Have you seen the words used to refer to women around here?

Makes Jesus weep.

[DirkGently]

140. Cheese & crackers, I always interpreted those as euphemisms for "taking the name ... in vain."

As for mockery, it can be in bad taste or needlessly unkind, but it can also be legitimate discourse. Certain segments of American Christianity in particular, so egregiously and dishonestly fling "Jesus" around that they invite and deserve mockery.

[Kali]

141. Holy shit!

I can't believe people are offended by jeebus. Here all this time I was using it so I won't offend believers with my foul mouth - normally I would say "Jesus Fucking Christ!" if for example, I hit my finger with a hammer.

I wonder what Jesus would think about it?

[DirkGently]

148. "Gee," I think you have a point.

Origin of GEE

euphemism for Jesus
First Known Use: 1884[div]

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gee

[frazzled]

142. I don't think it's disrespectful

Usually, when it is used that way (as Jeebus and Jeezus) it's invariably being used as an expletive—as is, "Jeebus, those Republicans are stupid!"

I think people don't want to use the actual word Jesus as a curse word in these contexts; that is to say, to take a the name in vain. That would seem disrespectful.

Let me say, that I am guilty of using it on rare occasion in this way, and that is my reasoning. I am not a Christian; and in the Jewish faith you are never supposed to write the name "G_d" out (whence leaving the blank). Even though we don't believe in the divinity of Jesus, I wonder if many Jews, like myself, think it would be wrong to write the name "Jesus" and use it in a demeaning way. That's what I've always thought at least.

But if it really bothers people, I'll just use the real spelling. Would it be disrespectful to say "Jesus, those Republicans are stupid"? It makes me uncomfortable to do so.

[Union Scribe]

145. It's a good way for posters to self-identify as

people who don't need to be taken seriously.

[Logical]

146. No one is sure Jesus was a real person, so I guess it is ok.

[ohheckyeah]

149. I'm not offended by it

but I just think it's silly and childish. It may have been slightly humorous the first 1,000 times.

It never fails for something like that to get run into the ground...the use of Gawd, Jeebus, edumacation, etc. have all been used until they are barf worthy.

[fujiyama]

150. I will never ever understand the over sensitivity some people have over religion

but I also don't get the blatant hypocrisy on the part of many liberals over insulting Christianity vs. say, Islam. Now personally, I think the "Praise Jebus" thing was funny when I first saw it on a Simpsons episode years ago. But its become kind of old.

Some Christians can get pretty worked up over perceived "blasphemy' in this country, but real blasphemy laws actually exist in other countries and people get killed over it. People are actually sentenced to death and are assassinated in Pakistan (and unfortunately violence has erupted in Western European countries as well).

I hate to single any particular group out, but typically Muslims are the worst in this regard. Maybe the experience in living in a truly free society (where people CAN insult others' beliefs) is a foreign experience, but there was more silent support over the killing of Theo Van Gogh and the attempted killing of the cartoonists and Salman Rushdie than many would like to believe...But similar problems have erupted in India, where a famous Indian artist painted Hindu dieties in the nude and he received death threats. And I'm assuming the "Piss Christ" artist received threats as well. Scorcecee's "Last Temptation" faced disruptions as well.

Blasphemy laws do not apply in a free society. They are basic violation of free expression. While we can only hope that people use good judgment, show decency, and respect others' beliefs, there is no right not to be offended. There is only the right to practice what you want free of interference of the state and of others.

In this regard people of all faiths need to grow the fuck up.

[Raine]

159. No, it's only reserved to insult Christian

using it to insult other religions would be so politically incorrect and not the liberal or elitist thing to do. IMO it's stupid and immature.

[Lil Missy]

160. It's a way of cussing without using his name in vain. That's why I do it.

[1stlady]

162. As a Christian

and a liberal Obama supporter, I find it highly insulting. Rethugs aren't the only Christians in the world, contrary to popular belief around DU. If we Christians created threads attacking atheist, I'm positive we would all be banned by now. I was called a nutcase for being a Christian in a thread regarding evolution and my post hidden. However, the poster who attacked me and called me a nutcase was allowed to continue posting anti-christian rhetoric. As a Christian, I believe God created all men equally. No race is inferior and anybody can achieve anything if they put their mind to it . Evolution is a theory that has yet to be proven and because it is such a far stretch and has so many holes, i doubt it ever will. On the flip side, The belief in god has been around since the dawn of man, and cannot be disproven. God is a superior being who has all mighty power over everything. This is my belief and I shouldn't be attacked because of what I believe in.

[RainDog]

166. Creationism does not equate with Christianity

You linked to a right wing nut religious idiot and made a sickening claim that evolution was racist.

Creationism has been absolutely disproven and is not credible. If you choose to believe it, that's your business, but if you choose to post rightwing b.s. here you will be called on it and rightfully so for spreading IGNORANCE.

Your problem is that you think that Christians have to deny reality in order to be a Christian. Well, you know what? NO DEMOCRAT in public office is going to support your anti-science position.

NONE OF THEM. why? Because they know it's ignorance. They may not call it ignorance b/c they want your vote, but it's ignorance.

The same assholes that you align with (creationists) were using the bible to claim blacks were inferior b/c of the bible all the way into the 1960s.

Evolution ABSOLUTELY DOES SAY that all people are created equal - i.e. that we are all from the same lineage and there is no such thing as race beyond phentotype (which is the physical manifestation of something.) Racism was part of western and every other culture long before science came along to DISPROVE IT.

And your arguments here are evolution again demonstrate that you are ignorant about evolutionary science because there is NO DOUBT that evolution is the best science available that is used by EVERY BRANCH of biology. If you really want to doubt evolution, you shouldn't go to the doctor because the doctor relies upon evolutionary theory to treat your illnesses.

Belief in god, the kind you hold, actually can be disproven. The earth, we know beyond a doubt, is older than a few thousand years. The universe is billions of years old and if you believe in biblical literalism, you are simply ignorant. That's a statement of fact. Only uneducated people do not know that the earth and the universe are far older than literalists claim.

You should be taken to task for spreading lies. That's what you're doing. Lying. You help to perpetuate stupidity by not taking the time to get an education and you pass along these lies to others. You hurt children you come in contact with by spreading lies - you hurt their chances to receive a decent education by lying to them.

You perpetuate right wing stereotypes by posting them here.

Frankly, I'm surprised you weren't tombstoned for that post because it was nothing but a disgusting pile of shit.

Here's what I had to say about you making this post:

actually, it seems you are as ignorant
since your "reason" for denying scientific fact is that the 19th c. was full of racists. lol.

Lincoln was a racist too. So do you deny the Emancipation Proclamation b/c Lincoln was a racist?
The founders of this nation were racist. So, do you think that discredits the theory of democracy b/c those who put it into practice in its initial iteration were racist?

See how stupid that line of thinking really is?

[RainDog]

167. And here's the jury decision on hiding your post

The jury, randomly picked, voting 6-0 to hide your post because ALL agreed it was right wing nuttery. So, if you don't like it that others here choose to base their lives on reality, you have the same problem as any other cult.

You call yourself a liberal - but creationism is considered a right wing, not a liberal.

Speak for yourself OP

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)

ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

This is right wing nutcase crap with articles on the site that are critical of Obama and Af-Am politicians in general. The source of the link, iow, is over-the-top to the max and wingnutty.

JURY RESULTS

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Mon Jan 16, 2012, 03:36 AM, and the Jury voted 6-0 to HIDE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT and said: I agree it's rightwing nuttery and should be hidden.
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT and said: Agree with the alerter. Even if it were a valid argument, it is easily sourced to RW nuttery.
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT and said: WOW! This is just...WOW!
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT and said: Hilarious wingnuttery.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT and said: RW racist crazy BS

[RainDog]

168. why don't you watch this

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/evolution/intelligent-design-trial.html

[RainDog]

169. Tell me how evolution has yet to be proven

You state it's full of holes. What are they?

If you want to make this claim and you are doing something other than parroting religious bullshit you were taught - explain how evolutionary theory does not hold up as scientific theory.

If you want your belief to be respected on par with science, demonstrate how the science does not work.

Otherwise, you're saying you want people to allow you the comfort of your ignorance.

And with that, I'm done until I get to hear your defense of creationism based upon reputable sources other than a document that was written as a story of a group of people and not as a science text.

The problem with religion is when it forces people to deform their thinking to support in unsupportable. If you want to argue a first cause - god set reality in motion - that's something else all together. If you want to claim the earth is thousands of years old and humans were created in their present form and have never evolved, prove it.

[harmonicon]

172. I think you need to get yourself a dictionary and learn what "theory" means in science.

Evolution is a fact. Denying it is just the same as denying any other proven fact. If I told you that I thought the world was flat, despite the fact that it is not, I don't think you should respect it as anything like opinion. The same goes for those who would deny evolution. You are doing yourself no favours by taking this position; you are only harming yourself.

[RainDog]

180. I doubt this person has the first idea about science

you should've seen the site she linked to.

it was on par with Jerry Falwell spouting bullshit from the grave.

some asshole was claiming Darwin was responsible for Hitler, ignoring the hundreds of years of systemic Christian persecution of Jews in all of Europe because of their religious beliefs. Honestly, it was one of the most repulsive things I've ever seen anyone post here who claims he or she is religious.

It was so intellectually dishonest, I cannot believe this person knows one fucking thing about evolution other than what some dumbass fundie has written who is equally ignorant.

I'm sick of this shit. The reason we cannot attain better govt. is b/c of the idiotic religious right in this nation - every other western democracy is able to pass human rights legislation and social safety net legislation and THE ONLY WESTERN NATION that remains backward is the one with so many who claim they're religious - and then use that religion to try to create a nasty little hell on earth.

so, fuck anyone who gets upset about people who don't respect their religion when their religion creates so many problems here. If we ever get to the point that other religions have enough members that they want to force their religion into politics, then fuck them too. They'll hear the same thing.

The worst thing that ever happened to the middle east was finding oil b/c of the unholy alliance b/t religious fundies there and a ruling caste who takes advantage of their gullibility. Same here.

[Snake Alchemist]

182. It is a theory.

One which I believe in whole-heartedly, but it does meet the definition of a theory. Although to say it's full of holes is disingenuous. I doubt lamarckism is making a comeback.

[harmonicon]

183. Yes, and "theory" in science means something much different than it does in common use.

It can't be a law, because there is no certainty that it will happen. Yes, scientific theories can sometimes be disproved, but until then, they function as fact. The way people use the word, they want it to mean something more like "hypothesis", which it is not. The theory of relativity is also a theory, and one on which a great number of scientific and mathematical advances have been made.

[Snake Alchemist]

188. No argument here. nt

[MattBaggins]

194. I don't believe in donuts

[harmonicon]

195. That's your right, and I respect it.

I, for one, think that mammals are simply communist propaganda, along with the number 7.

[Broderick]

196. The number 7 brings me to seals

And I often get them confused as to whether they are mammals or a fish. Now fish is manna right? Or is that bread? I get confused on that too. I like bread toasted. Maybe with Jam. Sometimes Jelly. Are Jellyfish fish? They have 7 jellyfish at the aquarium in Virginia Beach. Is it a conspiracy?????

[harmonicon]

199. Most of these not-things are probably cases of lizard/reptilian replacement.

They take the form of such non-real things to disguise their true alien nature and influence the bilderberg group in its spreading of chem trails which deliver drugs, like fluoride, into the populace so that they'll accept the not-real entities as facts.... but we aren't falling for it, are we?! That's why I put my money in gold.

[Broderick]

205. LMAO

[MattBaggins]

204. If they live in the water they are fish

If the Catholic church says capybara are fish and there for OK for lent, since they live in water; who am I to argue.

[Broderick]

207. LMAO

[RainDog]

186. In science, a theory is more important than a law

ala this explanation:

Scientific laws are similar to scientific theories in that they are principles that can be used to predict the behavior of the natural world. Both scientific laws and scientific theories are typically well-supported by observations and/or experimental evidence. Usually scientific laws refer to rules for how nature will behave under certain conditions. Scientific theories are more overarching explanations of how nature works and why it exhibits certain characteristics.

A scientific theory is a set of principles that explain and predict phenomena. Scientists create scientific theories with the scientific method, when they are originally proposed as hypotheses and tested for accuracy through observations and experiments. Once a hypothesis is verified, it becomes a theory.

iow, a scientific theory has enough evidence to support its initial hypothesis that it is considered the overarching explanation of how nature works and why certain observable phenomena exist.

A scientific theory is not accepted without PROOF which others can reproduce to prove, for themselves, that this theory is, in fact, the explanation for various phenomena.

This is why scientific theory is also called fact.

[Snake Alchemist]

189. I do not think that is the case

The theories of Vulcan and Spontaneous Generation come to mind.

[RainDog]

190. those were hypotheses that were never proven n/t

[Snake Alchemist]

191. Just because a test on a hypothesis gives a certain result, does not make the theory correct.

I do think that the theory of evolution is correct, but I just want to be clear on what a theory is.

[RainDog]

197. I noted what a theory is, above.

here it is again:

A scientific theory is a set of principles that explain and predict phenomena. Scientists create scientific theories with the scientific method, when they are originally proposed as hypotheses and tested for accuracy through observations and experiments. Once a hypothesis is verified, it becomes a theory.

So, yes, the prediction and the ability to reproduce the results (verify) is what creates a theory.

[Snake Alchemist]

198. And you admit a theory can be incorrect?

It is not an absolute.

[RainDog]

200. absolutes are the realm of religion

that's what's so bothersome, huh?

facts are not absolutes. facts correspond to experience. what occurred.

[Snake Alchemist]

201. I'll ask again. You admit a theory can be incorrect?

There are absolutes in science. If you drop an apple from a tree, it will fall to the ground. That is an absolute. I guess you can argue that absolute zero is also an absolute .

[RainDog]

202. that's a scientific law

of course a theory can be incorrect.

but when a theory has hundreds of years of experimentation to verify it, and there is nothing else that exists that can compete with that theory, then that theory is a fact - it's the experience of what occurred.

when there is a competing theory that offers anything else worth considering, then do so.

[Snake Alchemist]

203. Yes, it is. And that is the difference.

I am just playing devil's advocate which is funny considering the topic. I suppose evolution could be disproven one day, but it's incredibly unlikely given the amount of evidence supporting it.

[Marrah_G]

173. Leprecauns have also not been disproven

You are free to believe whatever you want to, but that doesn't make one immune from being giggled at by those who find your beliefs silly.

I say that as a member of a minority religion and what would be seen as clergy within that religion. If I spent all my time being upset by other people's view of my faith I would be a very tired woman.

[Shadowflash]

185. Heh. Yeah.

And having a magical sky fairy just 'poof' everything and everyone into existence makes WAY more sense than evolution.

[randome]

187. And yet you use the word 'rethugs'. Hmmm...

[MattBaggins]

192. If you deny evolution

you are going to get called a nut and rightfully so.

Right up there with chem trails, the moon landing and flat earthers.

[cleanhippie]

215. Please link to this post where you were called a "nutcase" and YOUR post got hidden.

I need to see this for myself. Link please, or it didn't happen.

[RainDog]

218. here it is

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002174201

the post is hidden but you can still read it and go to the link

[cleanhippie]

220. Thanks. Funny thing is, no one called here a nutjob, not once.

In that entire thread, "nutjob" cannot be found, not even once. So, she is apparently a liar too. And after reading here post, I am surprised that she is still here.

[RainDog]

222. I used the word

or some variation, in general, to refer to the guy who wrote the article posted and 1stlady took it to mean I was referring to her - but I was actually referring to any and all, not her.

at first I thought... I didn't say that... but when I read my replies after, I saw I did use the term but wasn't referring to her specifically.

however, anyone on this board who thinks people here are not going to respond to such a screed from a right wing fundie pastor are mistaken. while people who hold anti-science views are surely also people who vote for democrats, that doesn't make such beliefs okay or beyond criticism, in the same way that people can hold other whacked out beliefs but are not immune from others pointing out the fallacy.

[cleanhippie]

216. "Evolution is a theory that has yet to be proven and because it is such a far stretch..."

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

[LeftyMom]

221. You're not doing Christianity any favors by tying it to Creationist reality denialism.

If you're going to insist on the whole darned book of bronze age myths being judged completely true or false in one swell foop, pointing out that it's in clear conflict with observable reality is going to lose you far more converts than it wins. Please continue.

Thanks!
The Atheists.

[snooper2]

235. Does Jesus consist of matter

And is he the one making all those supernovas out there?

[Sky Masterson]

165. He was just a mortal man.

All men are. Nothing divine about him or any religious icon.
I find it hard not to look at those who believe in such magic without thinking "Are you fucking kidding me?"
Science is fact faith is fiction
fic·tion (fkshn)
n.
1.
a. An imaginative creation or a pretense that does not represent actuality but has been invented.
b. The act of inventing such a creation or pretense.
2. A lie.
3.
a. A literary work whose content is produced by the imagination and is not necessarily based on fact.
b. The category of literature comprising works of this kind, including novels and short stories.
4. Law Something untrue that is intentionally represented as true by the narrator.

[retread]

174. "I am not religious in the least. I just find it oddly antagonistic and out of place." Hmmm

For some reason I am reminded of the old cliche about what happens when you throw a rock into a pack of dogs.

The one hit with the rock is usually the one that yelps!

[LanternWaste]

175. I use the "bless your little heart" test.

I use the "bless your little heart" test. I imagine if a person is as trendy, as cynical and as clever to use one of your listed nomenclatures in a wholly sincere and non-offensive manner, that person will also realize that "bless your little heart" is no more and no less trivializing, minimizing or insulting as "Jebus"

[Meeker Morgan]

177. No free pass for evil insanity ...

... and yes that includes Jeebus himself and not just Republicans.

As for Muhammad ... [img][/img]

[Iggo]

178. Oh gawd.

Not this shit again.

[MNBrewer]

181. When Islam or Buddhism become the dominant Religious Machine of Oppression in the USA

I would say yes, we can interchange Muhammad/Mooohammad and Buddha/Booba. Until then, Jayzuhs is the appropriate target.

[sarcasmo]

193. I prefer sky being.

[Neoma]

209. I use jeez, gee, goddamn, jezus, etc.

Because they are popular phrases in the English language (when spelled properly) and I don't want to be directly affiliated with Christains. I can respect them as a person, but I'd be a hypocrite if I said I have an ounce of respect for the Christain religion. Which is the religion I come in contact with more.

I don't think religion should immediately protected from criticism with this, "That's very offensive." BS. When I can't seem to say the same things and have mass groups of people protecting my holy ass.

I would like to go throughout life without a bible shoved in my face, and this is why I am outspoken about it. You cannot avoid it. Our politicians are using the faith card, kids are shunned if they don't pray, and we have to fight for neutrality in courthouses, on money, and sometimes our own homes when it comes down to a family feud.

I'll say what I say. I really couldn't care if you're offended by how I hate religion. The only reason I like learning about it, is to find out how stupid humans have been over the years. It makes me laugh.

But that's me being extremely truthful on the matter. I wouldn't dare say I hate religion in public. I'd be mauled. But to be clear, I hate religion as much as I hate iceed tea, water in my ears, and Adam Sandler. To this Pantheist, it's just another subject to talk about. Not the end-all-be-all of the world. My life does not revolve around it and I'm glad it doesn't.

[Goblinmonger]

210. Do you type "G-d"

out of respect for those religions that don't feel you should use the name of god?

[Lance_Boyle]

228. 'God,' like 'Christ,' is not a name but a title or descriptor.

No way? Yahweh!

[Goblinmonger]

229. Yeah, does that deny that there are religions

that do not want to spell out the word "God" which plenty of people do here?

[LanternWaste]

231. Sects of religions, but not religions themselves...

I'm aware of one sect of Baptists and two sects of Presbyterianism which frown on (but do not codify) the full Hebrew spelling.

Which religion then are you referring to?

[Goblinmonger]

232. There is certainly a Hebrew/English problem

but the Jewish religion does not allow the name of god to be erased or destroyed and that has been transferred to the English spelling.

[Lance_Boyle]

233. The name of God is not 'God.'

It is Yahweh. There is no prohibition in Judaism against written use of the word "God."

[LanternWaste]

243. specifically which religion are you referring to...

Again, specifically which religion are you referring to which forbids spelling out the name of the deity?

To be honest, I know individuals who practice this habit our of deference-- but it is a personal decision rather than a religious tenet.

[Goblinmonger]

244. Jewish religion

forbids the name of god being destroyed or erased. Many have translated that to the English "God."

[Prophet 451]

217. Personally...

... I do that from time to time but what I'm mocking is not Jesus or his teachings (despite being a Satanist, I have a lot of respect for Jesus and his teachings) but the right's biazzaro interpretation of them. It just seems disprespectful to actually use Jesus's name when talking about the Republican party religion that's directly opposite to his teachings.

[snooper2]

234. It's supposed to be JESABUS

Combine jezebel and incubus

[MineralMan]

236. Aw, Geez...I mean Gee Whiz...No, I mean Cripes!

Or, maybe I meant Jeepers Creepers. All of those euphemisms were created by Christians to avoid using Jesus in vain. Of course, nobody named Jesus was alive in that part of the world at the time, so it's not even that person's name, but is a latinization of the name. Today, there are many, many people named Jesus. Odd, that.

It's not the word that matters, really. Do people use "Jebus" to express their distaste with some forms of Christianity? Indeed they do.

[FSogol]

240. How about "Gawd?"

I use that one a lot.

[NoGOPZone]

241. It was good enough for Duke Ellington, so it's good enough for me. nt

[Drunken Irishman]

242. Blame The Simpsons...

[Skip Intro]

247. dang, didn't work, never mind...

[Donald Ian Rankin]

248. It is permissible to do so; you will offend people if you do.

Just as it is permissible to deliberately deliberately misspell Jesus, but many people will find it offensive if you do.

The difference is that a large number of DUers wish to offend/are indifferent to offending Christians, whereas rather fewer don't care about offending Muslims or Buddhists.

Personally, I don't use either - I am strongly against all three religions, and regularly say things that will give substantive offense (I think that the factual claims of all three are absurd, and that the moral teachings of at least the first two and especially of Islam, as interpreted by the majority of their believers, contain a great deal of wickedness) but I try to avoid descending to meaningless abuse.