Did you learn of figures of speech during your English Literature classes?

Then you have dedicated little time to the topic and are basing your view on stereotypes.

For which I stand corrected and, as I said before, I apologize.

Indeed. That's what Jesus intended, yes. Too bad there's little agreement among Christians on what, precisely, showing love means.

I reserve the right to write using figures of speech such as hyperbole. It's part of the toolset of the language, and the fact it doesn't imply absolute assertions is a baseline presumed knowledge of anyone who went through high school.

Those numbers don't say much. The organizations I refer to aren't supported exclusively by GOP-aligned Christians. And, more importantly, they aren't fought against by most Christians who dislike their lying but agree with their end goals. There are Christians who do actively, strongly oppose them, and kudos to them. Most are at best indifferent.

To make an analogy, this is roughly the same distinction as that that between merely not being racist, vs actively being anti-racist. It's extremely easy not to be racist. It's hard and it takes effort to be anti-racist.

Well, the way I read your comments before our conversation on this /. post's comments section was thus: that you defend the tactic of an organization that uses mass pressure upon payment processors so they in turn use pressure upon companies to forcefully remove content you religiously disagree with, justified by the fact children will find a way to access that content irrespective of parental restrictions, which makes it legit for third parties to forcefully prevent not only children but also adults from having access to it -- in short, that you approve of cancellation.

Try and search for your name, then read your own comments in order, and you'll notice the above is a verisimilar inference from your first 11 comments.

If that's not the case, and you in fact oppose such cancellation tactics, then I deeply apologize for having reached that incorrect conclusion and criticized you for something you absolutely didn't do.

I've stated several times along this thread that what I'm saying doesn't apply to the few exceptions that don't fit the mold. Either you didn't read in full, or didn't pay attention when reading.

To recap: I refer to the liars plus those who enable the liars by actively supporting them, or through inaction. These three (liars, supporters, indifferent) form the majority. The minority that is none of those isn't the target of anything I'm saying.

Going back to the original point: you yourself are not in the minority. You support the lie that it's a duty of Christians to power intervene in society to force it to conform to Christian notions of decency. What Jesus said is for Christians to be role models so non-Christians will see their saintly life, feel inspired by what they see, and voluntarily follow their example, in turn becoming role models themselves. He also said that if Christians are persecuted because of living saintly lives, they're allowed to flee to somewhere else safe. That's it -- nothing more.

That's irrelevant. I could make my text more accurate and less readable by adding at every step quantitative qualifiers. The point I'm making would still stand, and that one you're actively not addressing.

This is a problem in understanding self-focused people tend to have. One talks about a problem most in group A suffer due to something many in group B do (e.g. A = women, B = men, so a woman says, "All men are X because Y!"). An individual P who is a member of group B feels negatively by the situation between A and B having been stated concisely, and so P goes and hijacks the topic by making it about P, rather than about A (e.g., guy hearing and interjecting "Hey! Not all men! I am not X as I never Y!"). Meanwhile the issue A is suffering falls into the background, so P was successful in aiding the bad elements of B to the detriment of A (e.g., the conversation is now about the guy, not about the problems those women face and wanted to discuss).

Very well, here are a few:

"Collective Shout" presents itself as a radical feminist group. It isn't, it's an Australian Christian fundamentalist organization founded and led by someone who adopted the language of feminism to advance (psedo-)Christian cancelling of whatever her preferred heresy dislikes.

Her organization follows the example of an US Christian fundamentalist organization which started honest, started fully declaring itself as Christian, led by Christians, driving a Christian agenda, which is quite respectable, but eventually noticed they were being dismissed. They then decided to rebrand, hiding every mention of being a fundamentalist apologetics organization and of their policies being based on their specific interpretation of Biblical passages. They now pretend do be scientific, lying through their teeth at every opportunity, every argument, for the greater good of course.

An older example of this pseudo-Christian behavioral pattern are the so-called Crisis Pregnancy Centers, Christian anti-abortion organizations that advertise themselves using deceptive language that make themselves look like they're abortion clinics. Women seeking abortions see those advertisements, get there, and then go through a procedure that also looks like it's going to get them to have the abotin they're seeking, but rather lead to multiple rounds of preaching (without making it clear it's Christian preaching, of course) to convince them not to abort.

Want another example? There's an entire network of anti-trans and anti-gay groups that present themselves as science-based, such as the deceptively named Society for Evidence-Based Gender Medicine and American College of Pediatricians, among several others, which function as public-facing for several Christian fundamentalist organizations and individuals that fund them. All deliberately, consciously, lying, and never, ever repenting from it when caught, but rather doubling and trippling-down on the deliberate lies.

And so on, and so forth, all following the same pattern, all liars with clear consciences, because there's a Cause That Justifies The Lies And The Future Will Vindicate Them.

Nope, what I abhor is disonhesty, and in the current day and age Christian organizations are the main driving force behind that sin of sins.

There are honest Christians who love truth above all else and will never, ever settle for less than absolute truth, but, as I said, they're a minority. So my criticism goes straight to the majority: the liars, and the lovers of those liars. While the first are the most condemnable, the later don't get out of it just because they were deceived, as they could, with minimal effort, seek the actual truth. And yet, they don't, and by their inaction their lying leaders thrive and grow, and the falsity encroaching the world with them.

And as Jesus himself taught, by the fruits one knows the tree. The Christian tree is now rotten. A few thin, short, weak branches still have life in them. For how long though, that's anyone's guess.

Because Christian activists are liars. They plan their campaigns carefully so as not to disguise they're religion-motivated. They cherry-pick minor data points and lie telling it's the sole evidence so politicians and others will be misled and do their bidding. They misname their ideology so those listening think they're part of something they aren't. They give names to their organizations that misled, counting on people mistakenly getting there rather than where they want to be. They rebrand over and over again when caught, so as to continue lying without facing the consequences of their lies.

There are good Christians who refuse falling into the moral bankruptcy of "lying for the greater good", "lying to save their souls", "lying for their own good", "lying because they too lie". But those are a tiny, noble minority.

The majority of Christians though? Weren't they fake hypocrites, they'd do as Jesus ORDERED them to, and look at the plank on their own eyes before talking about others.

Withewashed tombs, beloved sons of the father of lies, to hell with all of them.

Only when there's no fake "mass" protests "damaging" their "brand".

Japan is facing payment processors' racism right now due to those fake Christian "protests" "denouncing" content that's lawful and traditional in Japanese culture, forcing artists and merchants to remove decades of culturally appropriate content because of Western hypocrites and their "indecency" standards they themselves don't follow but have a HUGE hard one coupled with wet dreams in imposing upon others.

Thankfully, backlash is growing and eventually this ridiculous neo-neocolonialism will be stopped.

Hypocrite. You yourself accessed this content when you were under 18, and it caused you no ill.

You're not a special snowflake. If you did, and you did, your children can too, and they'll come out of it exactly as you did, no better, no worse.

Why do you hate sex?

Criticism of Trump.

Climate scientists bad-mouth Trump, so they need go. Climate denialists praise Trump, so their pet idea must be protected.

That's all Trump cares for and operates on.

They do realize this. They approve of it.

Conservatives generally operate from a circle-of-concern perspective. The people who matter are their immediate relatives, friends, neighbors, and coworkers. The topics that matter are those that directly affect them right now. Everything else is unimportant and ought to be stopped or, preferably, destroyed, so it doesn't take anything whatsoever from "me and mine", whether that's something I currently possess, or something I will or would like to possess.

And anyone who opposes this perspective on reality is an enemy, and a part of the stopped/destroyed -- personally and in everything they care for or about.

So, see, from all you wrote, the only aspect that's minimally relevant is the Dems stopped caring for blue-collar workers. That's accurate and factual.

The other topics you brought are right-wing media bogeymen designed to elicit strong emotions, with zero detrimental effect on 99% of the population even if they were pursued to total completion.

Given their track record, I think it'd be more accurate to say DOGE reported thousands of times on the same one subscription being paid for by the taxpayers, because it appeared on multiple databases, no one at DOGE normalized those because they have no idea how to do that, and as a result the cost informed in their report was falsely inflated by three orders of magnitude.

The Cass Review was prepared following the same careful method of scientific meta-analysis followed by RFK Jr. and his vaccine experts.

No "/s" because this is strictly factual, and even more worrying due to that.

Some will. His devouts will think something along these lines:

"Sure, prices are high, but that's because they are attacking the US, and killing babies, and mutilating children, and then grooming those mutilated children into going to their secret pizzeria underground dungeons where they're raped and then sacrificed to Beelzebub, all the while their invading hordes of international military cat-and-dog eating gangs roam the cities causing riots, because they hate 'Murica and must be stopped! And He's stopping them! So higher prices are a small price to pay for Saving Freedom and Democracy and the 'Murican Dream and Way of Life!!!1!11!!"

And so will adamantly oppose any call they may make for Trump to step down.