Democratic leaders are referring to Christians attacked in Sri Lanka as "Easter Worshipers"

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: Assassin82

It's short for Twitter: Catholic church worshippers on Easter Sunday.
Easter worshippers. That's the information in the whole thing. Easter worshippers.

What you are doing is a flawless example for taking things out of context.
Those bastard thought you knew about what incident they are talking!?
And the horrible things they say in those statement, right? You know the context.

You know what's even shorter than "Easter worshippers"? Christians.

a reply to: TheRedneck

You know the dilemma they had.

This is only an issue if the word "Christian" is offensive and un-PC. Given the way these people groom the LGBT + Whatever Other Letters We're Adding This Week crowd, Christian *is* an offensive and hateful, un-pC term to use. Christians are anti-LGBT + Whatever Other Letters We're Adding This Week. So they can't use that term.

However, it's equally PC not to acknowledge the large number of deaths of minority people.

So they have to come up with an alternative they feel is safe. Easter worshipper it is ... after all, they might be pagan.

a reply to: shooterbrody

Which song will you choose ?

Lucky for you, we’ve gathered the top Easter worship songs, and threw in some set list ideas, to make it easier than ever for you to build and LEARN your Easter Service Worship Set

worshiponline.com...

a reply to: ketsuko

Yep, it's kind of a big deal, I'm told.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
You should probably stop passing judgement on others religious ceremonies to only defend stupid tweets

More fake outrage.

There are 52 fridays a year, sometimes 53.

I said "unique" not "special" and even though they are treated as synonyms, there is a nuance in the way I used it.

all because they did not want to type christians

Yeah, that must be it because they have probably never typed it before and will struggle the rest of their lives to avoid it.

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

It doesn't have to be common. It is short for what happened to specific people at a specific day.

So I guess some guys shot some people who happened to be at a mosque in Christchurch? Because that's the thing they're doing.

You whine and whine and whine on the left about not denying people their identity, but this phrase actually does that in a way just as egregious ... it wipes out the identities of the people "who happened to be out worshipping something on Easter".

a reply to: alldaylong

Build all the strawmen you like as that is not used to describe dead christians slaughtered by islamic terrorists.
Is that a christian web site you linked or is that an online worshiper website?

a reply to: daskakik

Yeah, that must be it because they have probably never typed it before and will struggle the rest of their lives to avoid it.

For the 8 distinguished dems sited that may be accurate.
It would have been much simpler had their description been accurate.

More fake outrage. There are 52 fridays a year, sometimes 53. I said "unique" not "special" and even though they are treated as synonyms, there is a nuance in the way I used it.

How kind of you to determine what can make someone outraged and what can not.
Quite progressive I might add.
Especially to someone obviously on the outside looking in.

a reply to: alldaylong

I'm sorry, but the Archbishop of Canterbury clearly got it wrong. Those were just some people who happened to be at a mosque in Christchurch, just like so many of those Sri Lankans were just people who happened to be at churches celebrating Easter.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: daskakik


For the 8 distinguished dems sited that may be accurate.

I'm sure you can find them using the word "christian" if you care to look but that might cut into your outrage time.

It would have been much simpler had their description been accurate.

It would be just as simple if you realize that the term is ok and it isn't because they are out to get you. Although, they may still be out to get you.

How kind of you to determine what can make someone outraged and what can not.
Quite progressive I might add.
Especially to someone obviously on the outside looking in.

Where did I say you can't be outraged? Foam away.

I'm just saying that you are doing it to yourself because the term is even used by churches themselves and they are not trying to avoid the word christians.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: alldaylong

Build all the strawmen you like as that is not used to describe dead christians slaughtered by islamic terrorists.
Is that a christian web site you linked or is that an online worshiper website?

If you don't like those then you can by The Hymn Book.

This essential selection of 20 Easter hymns, packed with a fabulous mix of traditional and contemporary Easter worship songs is perfect for Easter celebrations, assemblies and worship services

www.outoftheark.co.uk...

As William Shakespeare once said " Much Ado About Nothing "

a reply to: scraedtosleep

Just a friendly reminder: Catholics are Christians.

originally posted by: oklalittledixie
a reply to: scraedtosleep

Just a friendly reminder: Catholics are Christians.

And those who dislike christians simply wont use the word.
Even when said christians are slaughered by islamic terrorists.
And no one is supposed to speak up about it or call out the dems about it.

a reply to: alldaylong

sorry the uk websites are censored;
you have any of them free usa websites?

your not in london by chance are you?

a reply to: daskakik

funny you see yourself as the arbiter of all things "ok"
the term easter worshiper is not ok in this situation no matter how you attempt to justify it

a reply to: shooterbrody

No, I see christians using the term, which implies that it is OK.

Go argue with them. I really don't have anything else to say.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: TheRedneck

You know the dilemma they had.

This is only an issue if the word "Christian" is offensive and un-PC. Given the way these people groom the LGBT + Whatever Other Letters We're Adding This Week crowd, Christian *is* an offensive and hateful, un-pC term to use. Christians are anti-LGBT + Whatever Other Letters We're Adding This Week. So they can't use that term.

However, it's equally PC not to acknowledge the large number of deaths of minority people.

So they have to come up with an alternative they feel is safe. Easter worshipper it is ... after all, they might be pagan.

excellent breakdown of their thought process
the pc crap has to go

a reply to: shooterbrody

Look at the bright side -- We now know how to make them all colorblind again!

I just need to bookmark this thread the next time race, orientation, ethnicity, etc., come up and are pivotal to a thread and argument.

Remember -- Some people did something. None of the details about any of it matter.

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: shooterbrody

No, I see christians using the term, which implies that it is OK.

Go argue with them. I really don't have anything else to say.

BTW, your lack of capitalization is also demeaning to the followers of Christ (not that I am, but at least I try to respect them). The word is "Christians", with a capital "C" since it refers to a person's name it should always be capitalized.

a reply to: daskakik

Interesting side you chose. How did you decide who was and who wasn't? That is a neat trick.
like I posted, telling people what is offensive and what is not, from the outside is a laff riot
good luck with that