• mikeyBoy14@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Christ man all I did was point out that the comic’s internal logic was an awkward fit for its theme.

    • Phlogiston@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s common for comics like this to reuse frames to reenforce that point that “everything else being the same” these two ways off responding to the first frame are fundamentally different. It’s not common to read the frames as all four of them happening in series.

      I agree, If we read them the way you suggest the meaning is less clear. Is flying proof of religion? Nope! It’s proof that this person can fly. What it does do though is provide a case of potential “supernatural” that can be explored for more information. What if he flew using fairy dust … does that prove Catholicism?

    • Rachelhazideas
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Funny how fast you clutch your pearls as soon as an ounce of good faith was given to your argument that had so little relevancy to the point of the comic.

      Acting offended doesn’t make you correct, it makes you hypocritical.

      • mikeyBoy14@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I feel like I’m taking crazy pills. You can like the comic and I can not like the comic. That’s perfectly fine.

        • Rachelhazideas
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          This has nothing to do with liking the comic or not. Stop moving the goal post. It’s about making bad faith arguments and then backtracking when people point you out on it.

      • rambaroo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Why do you think this level of aggression is justified? The guy isn’t being rude or unreasonable. Some of you are sounding totally unhinged in this thread.

        • Rachelhazideas
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Nice try with the double standards.

          It’s ‘aggression’ when atheists respond to a bad faith argument, and ‘not being rude or unreasonable’ when others pose the bad faith argument to begin with.

    • rambaroo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It is. It’s surprising to me how defensive people are getting over a comic. Flying is an obvious stand-in for the left character’s beliefs, so the people acting like you can’t treat it literally are just being intentionally obtuse. This thread feels like reddit all over again, and that’s not a good thing.

      • mikeyBoy14@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        This thread feels like reddit all over again, and that’s not a good thing.

        Agreed. I think it’s the upvote/downvote system. It’s an inherently flawed way to facilitate good faith discussions.