So...this article’s SUPER backwards.

I think I was just in responding to both you and Hollylujah the same—that user actually doesn’t think it’s satire (apparently), so I must have just...sucked. Anyhoo, yay for agreement!

It’s still satire, though, and purposefully so.

Right, but the point is that they aren’t “even more convinced”, they’re maximally convinced already. This just paints them into a corner where they have to be less destructive. Your original comment implied a certain counterproductive aspect, where their actions just made the fundies dig in deeper. They can’t dig in…

Certainly, it’s not “merely” satire in that it has a productive aspect that goes along with the general satirical point. But that doesn’t mean it isn’t satire at all, and honestly that’s what satire’s supposed to be for, so I’d argue that the “merely” is a skosh unfair.

Well, they’re already doing that, though. They already think it’s a moral crusade: They think they’re confronting baby murderers. So a “confirmation” of something they are already irrationally convinced of isn’t really a change to anything. What it does do, however, is make them have to face their hypocrisy in a way…

No, it most definitely is satire. They’re purposefully lampooning religion, using the same methods that the religious use in an reductio ad absurdum. They’re required to pretend they “really” are Satanists even though we know that they usually aren’t “really” Satanists. They’re atheists who are using the trappings of…

Oh, nothing! But in this case, for the satire to have its intended effect, they have to really stand by it. Like...Swift wasn’t trying to go to court to say he really truly wanted to eat babies, y’know?

Well, that’s what satire’s for, though. It’s not just making fun, or we’d call it that. It’s making fun for a purpose.

Y’know, I am an atheist. I believe that most of TST folks are, too. So I want to get all criticizey on them and say “Hey, don’t use satire to try to make your point, just use honest argument”. But y’know what? Their shit works. And it seems like it’s often the only thing that does, particularly with this sort of…

Because of the world we live in, why do I feel like he’ll get something like six months, so as not to ruin his relationship with his son or some shit?

I guess these reporters just find fascists fascinating.

My Pom/Chihuahua mix is also named Roux. That is...odd to me. Something about the Pom face, I guess, must say “Roux”

I know I shouldn’t try to parse these sorts of letters too hard, because they’re trying to be formal and so the word choice can be constricted and not connote what it might otherwise.

Hey, only one of my food issues is first-world-problemy. The other makes me legit sick; I still think it is why I have teeth that would kill me in a non-first-world country (and bankrupt me in a non-universal-healthcare country, sadly).

I’m sorry. I’d say “for...”, but, well, it’s everything.

I’m sorry for...everything. I have no words these days.

So you have no response to the substance of the point, then. Retreating into criticism of me and the way I said it, rather than the substance, is a fallacy, though it’s obvious you’re merely a racist troll. I was on my phone and still am, hence the less than stellar typing, but that’s irrelevant to your inability to…

Actually,that’s definitionally false. If you do racist things you’re a racist. Voting trump was a racist thing,and pretending otherwise is absurd. If your did that racist thing, you’re a racist.

No one argues that Nader voters were *the only way* he could have won, so your response is rather irrelevant. You’ll note a specific claim about 2000 wasn’t  really made, anyway.