WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2026 Poal.co

426

(post is archived)

[–] 1 pt

Can't impose Communist Totalitarianism on a religious people.

Yes you can, and it had been done.

The first time communism was associated with state atheism was with the USSR in Russia, but this was not the first time a communist system existed.

New Harmony was a commune formed in Idaho and was made up of Christians, same could be said in the middle ages, where similar forms for government were proposed in books such as "Utopia" from which we get the term, this was written by a religious scholar, and suggested a society with no private property, and no government, instead people simply were good (and godly) and shared everything in common, using only what they needed.

There was other suggestions for communist societies before then, dating as far back as ancient times, all of which were written by people who believed in the supernatural, specifically in religious concepts like God(s), afterlives, and the soul.

Communism isn't an idea that's new, and it didn't start with Marx, its been around a long time, and the addition of atheism is only at the much later ends of the history of the ideology.

[–] 1 pt

Devon nailed this analysis.

[–] 0 pt

He usually does. It was really hard to watch.

Yeah, because he got this one wrong.

Anyone who watched the Simpsons episodes he's showing us could see that he's lying to us here.

No he didn't see my reply.

[–] 0 pt

Your defense of the show is kind of sad.

Pop culture functions at its subliminal best when it flashes ideas before you that you aren’t consciously attending to, often through the use of humor and “throwaway” jokes. It also does better when the “conclusion” or “moral of the story” is out of sync with the far more relatable “jokes.”

The Simpsons has long functioned on memetic communication above narrative. Bart is a “delinquent,” but he was “cool.” Lisa is “preachy” but she isn’t “wrong.” Homer is a “moron” but he makes the most “salient” points.

A key role of Shakespeare’s King Lear is the Fool. Similarly, Groening and his staff of jews, pedos, and Ivy League elitists recognized the power of The Fool, which is why they couched their primary ideology and philosophical discourse in the “throwaway” belly laughs rather than linear stories. The stories themselves are often basic and straightforward, innocuous, even. It’s the portrayal of the “targets,” the snide “truisms” that everybody just accepts, that are the real manipulative content.

Wait, aren’t you the dipshit who posted your real info and doxxed yourself to the “Royal Cuck Mount-me Please?”

[–] [deleted] 0 pt (edited )

I'm not defending the show, I'm criticizing the analysis of it.

Also, yes, I am the one who self-doxxed, I've got nothing going, so I decided to try to make people feel more brave by putting myself in the worst danger I could, I wanted to do something ballsy that would make everyone else feel like they need to do something to at least compare to it in some way, the more risks are taken, the more is likely to be achieved.

The last part that I didn't respond to yet is mostly clips from later in the show, past when I stopped watching TV altogether, my criticism of the first part still stands, but wow, did that show take a hard turn, yeah, Groening is definitely not a Christian anymore.

The last part, where Devon talks about how people can't watch the Simpsons and be Christian at the same time was very much in touch with me and how I feel, even as an atheist, it describes perfectly how I feel about just tolerating people who insult my race over and over again.

And I can agree with so many people who are trying to not offend people who listen to evil zionist jews and their cultural marxist bullshit, rather than standing up for what they believe in.

The obvious difficulty here is, what should a Christian do? fight? speak out?

Would you violate the words of Christ to defend Christianity?

It's the old conversation I had with Christians on here before, knowing that Christ commands you to bear insult and injury, and not only that, but to do good to those who persecute you in such a way.

I got responses like "well, Jesus whipped the money changers on the temple steps and in the markets", the response is that Jesus is God, what applies to him doesn't to apply to us, for us is his commandments, which lie in contrast to what needs to be done in defense of the faith.

"well, Jesus called out the jews as his enemies", ok, assuming he did, what did he say we must do to out enemies as followers of Christ? and what would that get us if we were to do that?

I get responses like "well, Christians for centuries were unafraid to fight for their faith", the response is that they didn't know what the Bible's contents were, and were acting on the guidance of religious officials who wisely left out the more suicidal parts of The Good Book for the sake of king and country, when they went to fight for the sake of God, they were doing so in defiance of what God would have them do.

"and that would lead to the destruction of their religion", yes, it would, but the purpose of Christianity is personal salvation, not the eternal perpetuation of the religion itself, once one achieves their goal of entering Heaven, their mission as a Christian is over.

The Bible itself is a major obstacle for the Bible-believing Christian, there was a reason that it was considered a sin of heresy for Christian laymen to read the Bible, because the contents in it are destructive to any society that knows it and follows it's commands over all else, the priests knew that a large amount of their population were likely to do such a thing, with no concern for Earthly matters, and the whole religion, as well as any country that has the religion as the majority among it's people, would be destroyed by their enemies or from within as the godly would follow the words of Christ, and the ungodly would murder and rob them to oblivion.

There is a reason why there is a contingent of pro-Christian atheists on sites with dissident politics, like this site, who want to rewrite the Bible so that the problem verses are gone, and the book is more straightforwardly pro-White and pro-functional societies.

Make Jesus and his teachings like Devon here thinks they are and should be, but for some reason, even when the problems are pointed out, many Christians object to a rewriting of the Bible, for them, the religion is not a tool of social engineering, but something that is actually what it claims to be, the revealed word of God.

All that talk about how critical Christianity was for social engineering purposes all of a sudden think that this is no longer it's best selling point, this was a the issue with them going from saying "we need Christianity because it's true" to saying "we need it because it's useful".

Once you go there, and we accept the argument, the next step is to find ways to make it even more useful than it already is, and when we see some confusion over how to interpret the Bible, and we see parts of it that cause people to come to political conclusions that aren't helpful to securing what is important to us, we are obviously going to be suggesting that we update those parts to a version that better serves our needs.

In my experience, Christianity has not been useful to this part of the political spectrum, it has hurt us in a variety of ways.

For example, it's been a disaster on the subjects of sodomy and infanticide. the religion had ruined the right's ability to argue against homosexuality and abortion by usurping the place of secular arguments that exist against them, and casting the entire debate in a "religious nutcases vs rational thinkers" narrative, it had been nothing but a disservice, and the baby-killing faggots made great gains off the backs of that re-framing.

One thing that annoys me is that the Bible mentions the appropriate ages for sexual activity exactly zero times, there's no age of consent, and rape is treated as more of a property crime than an actual sin in itself. so it makes me laugh when Christians think they have something against pedophiles, they got something against faggots, and animal-fuckers and incest, but nothing on pedos, God did not see it as a crime even worth mentioning, yet the Christians go on about it like it was something God took issue with, if he was against a sick fuck of a man inserting himself into undeveloped poon, God would have said something about it. Worst of all, the Bible explicitly mentions it's a sin to add to the laws of God, or to speak for God, which means it's a sin for Christians to oppose pedophilia (at least, in this way).

The Christians can oppose the satanic rituals where children are raped, tortured, and have their blood drunk, but because it's murder, and the worship of idols. The Christians themselves have trouble with these two commandments, On the first note, we have the aforementioned problem of Christian passivity, and on the second note, we have the fact that Christians celebrate all manner of occasions that would be idolatrous, Christmas, for example, was banned because it was not a Biblically-approved celebration and therefore idolatrous, even if you claim to be celebrating the birth of Christ, the Bible explicitly mentions that it is still idolatry even if it's under the guise of worshipping the true God, if not Christmas, what should they be celebrating? jewish holidays, the ones Jesus observed with his disciples, like passover, the Bible recommends ditching holidays like Christmas for holidays like passover.

Then there is this mention of something called "objective morality", what about the Christian morality is objective? Even if God, the creator of the universe, had handed down a set of moral instructions, It's still just some guy's opinion, I see nothing more "objective" about that morality than about the "objectivity" of how we should dip tea bags into our water, rather than cut them open and dump the tea leaves into the cup, as was the tea bag's creator's expectation.

This is almost all quotes or Homer and Bart being anti-Christian. They spend the rest of their time being idiots who get shown up by the female members of their family, who take the opposite position from them in most cases, including where it concerns Christianity. The clips are taken out of context, and I recognized at least two of them coming from episodes with wholly pro-Christian messages to them. Devon isn't being honest here, this is not his best analysis.

[–] [deleted] 0 pt (edited )

Cherry picked, a lot of the examples he cites here fall apart when you see the full episode, or even when you consider the real meaning of the scenes in the full context of the show as a whole.

  1. Church attendance is not the same thing as being Christian:

The first thing this guy gets wrong is that he conflates attending church services with being Christian, as any Christian on this site can tell you, Church =/= Christianity, lots of us are Christian, but not church attending, lots of us here are atheists, but still attend a Christian church.

With that out of the way, we move onto his first point, that attending church is shown as being boring, and people are willing to do what they can to get out of it, note that these examples are not attacking Christianity, Homer isn't talking about leaving Christianity, he's talking about not ATTENDING CHURCH.

He is a Christian at the beginning of the episode, he's one when it ends, and he remains one all throughout, his conflict is solely regarding going into a specific building every Sunday, not about whether he thinks God exists or not, or whether Jesus is his son, and whether he needs to accept him as his lord and savior in order to be redeemed for his sins, all of these axioms are never questioned in the episode.

The only quote I can find from Homer in that episode that argues against Christianity and not just against church attendance, is the "what if we have the wrong religion?" question, but throughout the episode, it's shown that Homer is still a God-fearing Christian, so he probably is not meaning to make an argument against religion, but rather making any argument he can to get out of church attendance.

  1. Church is boring:

The criticism of church as being something boring, that husbands and sons had to be dragged to (Marge and Lisa were the ones dragging them along), was included because it was very true of 90's families, this is coming from someone who was around in the 90's, I know for a fact that the typical kid was not happy with getting dressed up, going to a building where some man would give a speech while the kid would be restlessly kicking his legs, you might as well be taking him to a boring play or presentation.

This was a very in-touch with reality take on the lives of a Christian kid, especially a boy, who would have such energy in them and so many distractions of the era that he'd be absolutely explosive by the time the service ended., the best part of the day for him would be that he gets to see his friends when the service was over. for this not to be included in a comedy show of this sort would be something that would stand out as a missed opportunity and would make the show look out of touch with the common American experience.

Also, note that it's only homer and Bart who oppose going to church, this shows that the episode is PRO-CHURCH, because of the glaring elephant in the room here.

Homer and Bart are supposed to be idiots who learn a lesson, Marge and Lisa are supposed to be the wise ones who get it right from the start:

A lot of the commentary in this video on what "The Simpsons" supposedly thinks about God falls apart when you realize that Homer and Bart are supposed to represent the worst of Americans, Bart and Homer are supposed to be what the author considers to be imbecilic, and this is obvious.

Lisa and Marge are supposed to be the wise ones that speak for the author, and they take the opposing side to Homer and Bart in each of these episodes, and by the end of each episode, whenever they disagree, it's almost always Marge and Lisa who are vindicated, and homer and Bart end up switching to the female side of things.

Once again, You'd do well to remember, Homer is, and always was supposed to be, the example of what the show's creators DISAGREE with, he's an idiot, and is almost always shown as being wrong on whatever point he believes in by the end of the episode, Bart is the same, but in child form. Lisa and Marge are supposed to be the examples of what the show's creators are promoting, and both of them disagree with Homer and Bart on these positions.

  1. "Even God agrees with Homer":

This is bullshit as well, look at the clips again, god only speaks to homer in his dreams, he's easily persuaded by Homer's meager arguments, and shares Homer's opinions on everything, he even shares Homer's passion for HandEgg, the show is making things clear as day when it shows Homer is fast asleep during these encounters, this is Homer's concept of God, not the actual God of the Bible, but the way one mortal perceives him, and not a particularly bright one, either.

"we should all be these floating atoms in space, doing our own thing":

In this episode, Homer becomes a hermitic monk, a very Christian one, but one who cloisters himself in his home, and observes God in private (you know, like how Jesus explicitly tells his followers to), he is not only still Christian, but he's actually living truer to the Bible's recommendations on being Christian than most Christians in the show.

The episode says nothing about moral relativism, and maintains that morality is still within a strictly Christian framework, this guy is inserting his own bullshit where it doesn't fit, in order to shoehorn this episode into saying things it isn't even suggesting or implying.

It's painful to see this level of shoehorning, I think he came to the conclusion before making the episode, and when things didn't quite fit, he tried to force it in, just cut this part out and find a place where you can better point out the existence of an anti-Christian position.

  1. "The Bible is gross":

the point of the clip was that the bible is engrossing, but Bart, who is an idiotic kid pre-occupied with looking "cool" would be afraid of anyone catching him enjoying it's contents, he objects to it for the same reason that he objects to doing ballet and having fun doing it, because it hurts his image in the eyes of other kids and himself, he sees himself as this edgy rebellious and masculine figure, so anything that is not these things is something he's going to reject, the show makes this part clear.

Bart is what the creator of the show is using as an example for what they oppose someone being like, he's supposed to set a good example by being the bad example.

This guy is just going on with saying things that the show is not saying, or even implying, even if we solely go by the parts he presents, and pretend we have no cue what "The Simpsons is", it's mostly just him going off about what is important to him.

I absolutely hate it when people do this, take some source material, and make less than a percent of it a part of your "analysis" and the rest of it is just you going on and on about your own opinions. This is not an analysis, this is just you giving us your take on something while disguising it as being related to something else.

It's like someone whose nominally giving a report on a book, but spends most of their time talking about animal rights, when the contents of the book they did a report on had little if anything to do with such a subject. if the book is well-known, they are essentially just hijacking the book's popularity to trick us into listening to them talk about something completely different.

An analysis should be at least half source material and half commentary, and the commentary should keep it's contents strictly within the boundaries of what the source material touches upon, not insert something into the source material that it hasn't even eluded to.

  1. "prayer has no place in public school, facts have no place in organized religion"

The next clip has the following quote from super-intendant Chalmers, in this episode, Flanders replaces Skinner as the principal, Chalmers is pleased with his work until he heard a prayer on the announcement box, whereupon Flanders is fired and Skinner re-hired.

Chalmers is shown to be an oppressively beurocratic figure, so it makes sense he would be so afraid of violating the separation of church and state and getting his school's administration in trouble.

The statement "facts have no place in organized religion" is something I'd think that Christians would agree with, after all, don't they talk about "walking by faith, but by sight" and presuming the existence of God, rather than the opposite, solely on the basis of the "witness of the holy spirit"? The basic claim is pretty much the same, take it from Jesus himself, when he said to doubting Thomas: "you have seen me and believed in me, blessed are those who believe in me and have not seen me".

Was Chalmers Jewish? I don't think I ever recall seeing what his ethnicity/religion was, Is Devon just making something up here? can anyone send me a link? i know for a fact that Krusty was Jewish, that was a major plot point.

  1. "Everything is a sin, we aren't even supposed to go to the bathroom"

I don't know what part of the Bible would make us not able to go to the bathroom, but depending upon the circumstances, the Bible gives quite a few ways that a divorce could happen, of the things that are considered sinful in the Bible, divorce isn't one of them so long as it's done at the right time, though a divorce under circumstances outside what the Bible describes would be (possibly, could be that there might be nothing wrong with it, but it wouldn't be biblically proscribed, either).

I do know that the Bible is indeed very impractical, most Christians don't obey the entirety of the Bible because it would be impractical for them to do so, see "the year of living Biblically" to see a but of what that was like for a guy who tried it, and immediately he had to throw a lot of stuff out of his experiment because quite a bit of the Bible's suggestions would land him in jail or in desperate poverty.

Yes, a lot of the Bible's contents regarding what people should do, or should not do, are indeed "silly", there was one cult that wanted to be true to the Bible before the law, and they got busted for allowing children to have sex with adults, they figured that since there was no age of consent in the Bible, that they should not recognize it either, the closest thing to an age of consent mentioned in the Bible was "it would be better for one to drown with a millstone around their neck than it would be for them to lead little ones to sin", but the Bible never mentions having sex while underage as being sinful in the first place, the thing that was mentioned was leading little ones to worship other Gods, so I guess it was ok for them to "marry" grown men to little girls.

That next clip was of Homer, who knows nothing of anything, saying that the Bible teaches nothing but gender roles, this is the same episode where he's depicted as a sexist oaf, the takeaway most audiences would get from such a part of the episode is that "Homer knows nothing of the Bible AND has regressive opinions". the rest of the show, and indeed the very episode featured here, goes out of it's way to show this to be the message we are supposed to be getting.

Okay, now it's just Devon talking about atheism and how he dislikes it, this is just "Simpsons" in the background.

  1. "the existence of the soul"

in this episode, Bart sells his soul to Milhouse, he loses the ability to project his breath, he loses the ability to laugh, and other supernatural events occur that indicate that the soul is a very real thing.

It's telling how dishonest an "analysis" this I when he shows an episode that gives supernatural evidence in the episode of the existence of the soul, and claims that the very same "The Simpsons" episode rejects the existence of the soul, either he didn't watch the episode he's showing us, or he did, saw that it had the opposite message he wanted it to have, and then selectively edited parts out of it to make a claim to the contrary.

At this point his editing is getting choppy, I think he's trying to trick us into thinking that "The Simpsons" is promoting a message about religion that it actually isn't, my feeling is strong that he saw these episodes, and they didn't have the blatantly anti-Christian messaging he wanted, and so resorted to this misrepresentation.

Again, it's all quotes from Bart and Homer, these aren't characters to respect, they are comics, goofballs, idiots, you are supposed to point to them and laugh at how stupid they are, not agree with their statements s though they are insightful.

  1. Devon has told an outright lie.

"nearly everything that came out in the 90's has attacked Christianity"

Actually, the 90's was full of very pro-Christian programming, on TV and in the movies, this is a quote that no one who was alive in the 90's and remember the movies that were featured then could honestly agree with, and these weren't just Christian shows and movies, but movies and TV shows that merely had pro-Christian messaging, that the Christian god was real, and that the Jesus story was true, and that both of them are good, and that Christians are good people.

I grew up in the 90's Devon, don't bullshit me, I remember when the movie "left behind" broke bank as a blockbuster, and not only sold well, but got sequels released that didn't do as well, but didn't do badly, either. The books were major hits, and it even got a shitty video game made of it.

I saw "bruce almighty" and the sequel "evan almighty", both of which were basically just apologizing for God with "he has a huge workload, even with his omnipotence", We had shows like "touched by an angel" and "joan of arcadia" which made a lot of money and ran on a premise that was explicitly pro-Christian, not to mention the "indiana jones" series, which was both very pro-Christian (featuring artifacts like the holy grail and the ark of the covenant), those were obvously legendary.

Even the shitty Disney shows in the 90's had pro-Christian episodes to them, they even released "the prince of Egypt", which was the Moses-in-Egypt story.

There's no way Devon doesn't know all this, before it was merely misleading, now it outright lies.

Were there anti-Christian shows and movies in the 90's? sure there were, "dogma" comes to mind, but most shows were very much either neutral or positive on the subject of Christianity, the negative position shows were outliers, not the norm, I remember because I was both a Christian and an atheist in the 90's and 2000's, I remember being concerned with the presence of anti-Christian stuff in the media (where it showed up on occasion), and concerned with the lack of it in the media as well, because there wasn't very much overtly anti-Christian stuff in the media at the time, so either i got fixated on what few of it existed, or fixated on how few of it there was compared to the opposite (pro-Christian messaging).

Devon isn't someone who is unfamiliar with the media of this time, so he's just lying his ass off here.

Lastly, the episode where God is shown is showing him each time while Homer is asleep, this is Homer's vision of God, and of course he's going to agree with homer on everything, Homer still changes his mind about religion at the end of the episode, which has a message that church is important and should be attended.

This counter-analysis is too long already, so I'll leave on one point:

That the show as a whole shows religion, particularly Christianity, as being a good thing, it has shown bad qualities about the Christian religion, like how Christian preachers do need do pull stunts to get the church funded and put asses in pews, but on the whole the message is that religion in general, and Christianity in particular, are good and valuable things for people to have in their lives. In the end the diagnosis is that it is good.

For example, Homer stops going to church, while some parts of this show him as making points about how "God is everywhere", and that "he should be able to worship God in his own way", this is shown as him being lazy and entitled.

At the end of the episode, he realizes that religion is important, his life is saved from a burning building by people of various religions, including Krusty (a religious jew) and Apu (a practicing hindu),also Flander's house gets set on fire, but god immediately puts it out, and Flanders is supposed to be the morally straight ultra-Christian stereotype, homer then goes back to attending church after this.

Matt Groening is himself a Christian, he's a liberal democrat, but a Christian one, at least that was last time I saw him talk about his religious values in an interview, which admittedly was a while ago, but those were the days when he was making episodes like these.

Since then his spokesperson in the series, Lisa, converted to Buddhism, so I'm guessing he was following the trend of Eastern religion among liberal celebrities back then.

It's shown that Christianity has saved lives, it's gotten people through tough times, helped people in need, given people a sense of purpose and moral guidance, given people answers to tough questions, and it's created a community that has been of great benefit for those who belong to it.

The Simpsons position on Christianity is like it's position on liberalism, it can at times show the worse parts of it, but for the most part, it treats the ideas associated with the political ideology far more positively than any alternatives, of which the show features just one, republican conservatism, which is depicted as being a wholly evil ideology of millionaires sitting around a table talking about how best to fleece the poor.