Why should I have to care about everyone's feelings? I could see it being wrong if he made an insult towards 43, but he did not. Are you saying that I shouldn't say that I'm an Atheist since it would hurt a Christian's feelings? That's not my problem. If their feelings are hurt, it isn't my fault.
The accounts aren't wrong but the way they're being portrayed as an insult is wrong. It's satire. A play-on-words of someone else's blog title to show their opposite view.
EDIT: I mean, of course I should care about people's feelings. But not to where I have to hide my own views so that their feelings aren't hurt. I don't want to come out as a selfish person or anything. Because, when I share my views, my intentions are far from trying to hurt someone's feelings. I care about many people a lot, including 43. He is an awesome dude. I don't want to get misunderstood. Of course, I care about people's feelings. I care about people's feelings a lot.
You seemed to have missed the point of my post.
I'm saying the exact opposite of what you're claiming I said. You can say your opinion all you want. It's usually when you direct it specifically toward another person that it's not good. You saying "I'm an atheist" is directed toward no one, so there's no issue with that. Kitsu was not punished for saying he was an atheist. If he did say that, and a person was offended, they would have no grounds on which they can claim it was an intentional insult. Here it was not merely expressing an opinion -- it was parodying another's post, thus giving that person the full right to complain about it. As Locke said, if it had come at another time, it would be fine. But here it was a thinly veiled attempt to mock the other person.
If he had posted an entirely separate blog about Christianity being stupid or whatever... Fine. It would upset people, certainly, but would it have really caused such an uproar? Even if he specifically quoted 43ForceGems and pointed out all the issues in the song. That would not have been nearly as insulting as this was. Here he's simply talking about... Nazis and... whatever else the parody song was about. This is showing a complete and utter lack of respect for the other person. He didn't even directly address him. And that's what's being punished.
Additionally, saying it's satire doesn't do much for your argument, in my opinion. Satire can be just as if not MORE hurtful.
To be fully clear: from my perspective,
it is not WHAT Kitsu said that's the issue here, it's the WAY that he said it.
Maybe there are other instances of unfair punishment of atheists simple because they criticized religion. But I don't see that here.
You're going with the theme thus far; many here are assuming that because the blog criticized Christianity, it automatically equates an attack, or trolling as you put it. This is exclusive to religious topics. If the video was criticizing a band or something, no one would think twice. But because it criticized religion, it's automatically labeled trolling and an attack. This is devoid of logic and reason. It says that every action concerning religion -- in particular, Christian faith -- is by default an attack, which is simply not true. Again, if 43 had posted something about, say, a band he liked, and I posted a video criticizing that band or whatever, this wouldn't be an issue. It's because when it comes to religion, there's this absurd notion that you can never offend anyone or do anything that might possibly critique their faith.
I hear this every single time someone is punished while criticizing religion. Really, you can't use this excuse to justify every single mistake that you make. Even criticism -- no matter the subject -- can be hurtful and wrong if it gets out of hand. Haven't you ever heard of those teenagers who commit suicide because of criticism of their bodies? Maybe that's not the best analogy and a rather extreme one at that, but it still proves my point: mockery is rarely ever the best way to state an opinion. It's best to address it directly and, if possible, suggest improvements.
Also, how do you know that if you had been criticizing a band rather than religion, then you wouldn't have been punished? If it had been in the same mocking manner as this, and 43ForceGems had expressed the same attachment to the band as he did to his religion, then yes, I think you would have been punished still. If you simply made a video criticizing it in a respectful manner, then few people would have listened to 43ForceGems's complaints, because his reponse would have been an overreaction.
If you feel this way because Christians have gotten away with mocking atheism in a disrespectful manner like this and not been punished in the past, please being it up with a mod. I'm fully willing to defend you on that, because that's not fair.
You're not trying to say that as long as you're criticizing someone's opinions, you should be allowed to do whatever you want, are you? Since you seem to not agree with the mods' decision, where do you draw the line as a criticism being too much? Again, I think you're exaggerating when you say that this method labels EVERY criticism of Christianity as an attack. As I said before, you could have directly responded to 43ForceGems and pointed out everything you disliked in his song. Do you honestly believe you would have still received an infraction? And that's a real question, not lined with sarcasm; I'm genuinely curious if you think that.